Hampson v. Hampson, 012221 FLCA2, 2D19-1105

• Docket Nº: 2D19-1105
• Opinion Judge: LABRIT, JUDGE.
• Party Name: EDWARD J. HAMPSON, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. JOAN M. HAMPSON, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
• Attorney: Jean Marie Henne of Jean M. Henne, P.A., Winter Haven, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Victor R. Smith and Jeffrey I. Burry of Victor Smith Law Group, P.A., Winter Haven, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
• Judge Panel: KHOUZAM, C.J., and BLACK, J., Concur.
• Case Date: January 22, 2021
• Court: Florida Court of Appeals, Second District

EDWARD J. HAMPSON, Appellant/Cross-Appellee,

v.

JOAN M. HAMPSON, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

No. 2D19-1105

Florida Court of Appeals, Second District

January 22, 2021

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Michael P. McDaniel, Judge.

Jean Marie Henne of Jean M. Henne, P.A., Winter Haven, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

Victor R. Smith and Jeffrey I. Burry of Victor Smith Law Group, P.A., Winter Haven, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

LABRIT, JUDGE.

Edward Hampson (Former Husband) appeals the final judgment dissolving his marriage to Joan Hampson (Former Wife), challenging the award of permanent, periodic alimony on multiple grounds; he also challenges the denial of his motion for rehearing. Former Wife cross-appeals the denial of her request for attorneys' fees and costs. Only one issue warrants reversal. We reverse and remand to recalculate alimony based on net income instead of gross income. Because this recalculation will require consideration of Former Husband's current salary (which was unknown to the trial court when the final judgment issued), on remand the trial court should reconsider both the amount of alimony and whether to award attorneys' fees and costs to Former Wife.

Background

After nearly thirty years of marriage, Former Wife filed a petition for dissolution in March 2017. Former Wife was the primary caregiver for the couple's four children, and in recent years, began working part-time outside the home. Former Husband held an executive position with a distribution company until his employment ended in October 2017. Former Husband was continuously unemployed from October 2017 up to the time of the dissolution hearing in October 2018.

The parties were both evaluated by a vocational expert and stipulated to admission of the expert's reports for the trial court's consideration in determining alimony. The trial court imputed annual income of $17, 850 to Former Wife and $104, 131 to Former Husband. The trial court awarded Former Wife $3500 in permanent, periodic alimony.

Discussion

The alimony award was based on both parties' imputed gross incomes. Basing an alimony award on gross income rather than net income is reversible error. Hanson v. Hanson, 217 So.3d 1165, 1166 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) ("An award of alimony must be based on the income that is available to the party, i.e.,...