LaFlam v. LaFlam, 2D02-3120.

Decision Date10 September 2003
Docket NumberNo. 2D02-3120.,2D02-3120.
Citation854 So.2d 809
PartiesMarie Elena LaFLAM, Appellant, v. Kevin P. LaFLAM, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Andrew J. Rodnite, Jr., of Reeser, Rodnite, & Zdravko, P.A., Palm Harbor, for Appellant.

M. Katherine Ramers of M. Katherine Ramers, P.A., Dunedin, for Appellee.

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

In this dissolution of marriage action, the parties amicably resolved all issues except alimony. The circuit court denied Mrs. LaFlam's request for permanent, rehabilitative, and bridge-the-gap alimony. We reverse for further proceedings because the court determined the alimony issue after improperly imputing income to Mrs. LaFlam.

The LaFlams were married in December 1988. At that time, Mr. LaFlam was in the military and Mrs. LaFlam was working for an international banking organization in Washington, D.C. Shortly before the wedding, he was seriously injured in a car accident and became a quadriplegic. In May 1989, Mrs. LaFlam left her employment to provide her husband with full-time nursing care. She obtained training at a hospital so that she could supply the level of care Mr. LaFlam needed. Mrs. LaFlam continued to provide this care until mid-1996, when the Veteran's Administration began giving Mr. LaFlam skilled nursing care at no charge.

Neither of the LaFlams held any significant employment during their marriage. They lived on Mr. LaFlam's Veteran's Administration and Social Security benefits, which, at the time of the final hearing, were about $7000 per month. Mr. LaFlam attended college and obtained a bachelor's degree. After the Veteran's Administration began providing a skilled nurse for Mr. LaFlam, Mrs. LaFlam returned to college and earned a master's degree in linguistics. She testified that she did so because she enjoyed that field of study. She never intended to support herself with her degree because the couple's needs were met by Mr. LaFlam's benefits.

In its detailed order denying alimony, the circuit court addressed the factors enumerated in section 61.08(2)(a)-(g), Florida Statutes (2000). When rejecting Mrs. LaFlam's request for alimony, the court imputed $4000 per month income to her. The court apparently based the amount on her 1988 salary at the international banking concern in Washington, D.C. At that time, she earned $3600 per month. Her income was not taxed because she was a Peruvian citizen.

A court may impute income to a spouse who is earning less than she could with the use of her best efforts. Ritter v. Ritter, 690 So.2d 1372, 1374 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). However, there must be competent, substantial evidence supporting the conclusion that the spouse could earn the imputed amount. See Hinton v. Smith, 725 So.2d 1154, 1156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)

(explaining that the standard of review of a court's decision to impute income is whether competent, substantial evidence supports its conclusion).

Nothing in this record established that Mrs. LaFlam, now aged forty-five, was capable of earning the salary she gave up some thirteen years earlier in order to care for her husband. In fact, there was no record evidence whatsoever about the nature of her position in Washington, what skills were required,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Andrews v. Andrews, 5D02-3091.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 13, 2004
    ...record to support the level of income imputed to a spouse. See Gerthe v. Gerthe, 857 So.2d 306, 307 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); LaFlam v. LaFlam, 854 So.2d 809 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). In this case, the only evidence regarding Rebecca's income was her prior salary of $75,466 earned in 2000, and a past e......
  • Porter v. Porter, 1D03-2124.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 21, 2004
    ...her current employment prospects and making particularized findings, the trial court erred as a matter of law. See LaFlam v. LaFlam, 854 So.2d 809 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (concluding that trial court's imputation of income to former wife in amount she had earned when she left work force 13 years......
  • McCants v. McCants
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 9, 2008
    ...evidence to support its finding concerning imputed income. See Gruber v. Gruber, 857 So.2d 329 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); LaFlam v. LaFlam, 854 So.2d 809 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Gruber involved an alimony modification proceeding. The former husband's income consisted of only disability benefits, and d......
  • Brown v. Cannady-Brown, 4D06-113.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 18, 2007
    ...record to support the level of income imputed to a spouse. See Gerthe v. Gerthe, 857 So.2d 306, 307 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); LaFlam v. LaFlam, 854 So.2d 809 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). In this case, the only evidence regarding [the former wife's] income was her prior salary of $75,466 earned in 2000, an......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Alimony and support
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Florida Family Law and Practice - Volume 1
    • April 30, 2022
    ...which was greater than her salary earned 13 years prior before she gave up her job to care for disabled husband. [ Laflam v. Laflam, 854 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Kranz v. Kranz, 737 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (error to focus on courses taking, and degree rather than earning capac......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT