Lewis v. Lewis

• Decision Date: 21 May 1980
• Docket Number: No. 78-1305,78-1305
• Citation: Lewis v. Lewis, 383 So.2d 1143 (Fla. App. 1980)
• Parties: Michael E. LEWIS, Appellant, v. Linda F. LEWIS, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 1143

383 So.2d 1143

Michael E. LEWIS, Appellant, v.Linda F. LEWIS, Appellee.

No. 78-1305.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 21, 1980.

Larry Klein and Albert T. Sims, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert V. Romani of Farish & Farish, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

DOWNEY, Judge.

The appellant seeks review of a final judgment of dissolution of marriage.

As a result of this twelve year marriage the parties had three children who were minors at the time of the final judgment.Both parties are college graduates.The wife was working as a part time teacher earning $154.00 every two weeks.The husband was employed by the State, earning $214.00 every week.During the course of the marriage the parties had acquired two pieces of jointly held residential real estate known as the "Pine Knob" and "West End" properties.The former is valued at approximately $24,000 net and the latter is approximately $18,000 net.

In the final judgment the court a) awarded custody of the three children to the wife together with $325 per month child support, b) required the husband to pay medical and dental expenses for the children, c) ordered the husband to maintain a $10,000 life insurance policy with the children named as irrevocable beneficiaries until they reach 18 years, marry, die or otherwise become self supporting, d) awarded the wife the Pine Knob property as lump sum alimony, e) ordered the husband to convey his interest in a Maverick automobile to the wife, f) ordered the West End property sold and the proceeds divided 60% to the husband and 40% to the wife, g) awarded the wife $3,000 attorneys fees and $300 costs.The husband contends it was error to award the wife the Pine Knob property as lump sum alimony, the Maverick automobile and attorneys fees.By cross appeal the wife assigns as error the 60/40 division of the proceeds of the West End property.

The Florida Supreme Court recently endeavored to bring some stability to the area of law dealing with alimony and the disposition of property in marriage dissolution cases.Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197, Fla.1980, involves a reexamination of the criteria and standards guiding the courts in a determination to award a particular form of alimony, be it lump sum, permanent, periodic or rehabilitative.There are indicators in Canakaris that many of the old strictures applied to alimony in general and lump sum alimony in particular, developed in the cases over the past several decades, have been either relaxed or eliminated.¹However, it is difficult to determine the extent to which the Court intended to go in this effort to clarify the law.With regard to lump sum alimony, the Court did not expressly recede from Cummings ² and Meridith ³, and yet, if this decision was intended to relax the rules applicable to lump sum alimony, the requirement that there be some positive necessity to justify such an award would no longer seem applicable.

In any event, we feel confident that the award of the Pine Knob property to the wife as lump sum alimony can be supported by either a liberal or conservative interpretation of Canakaris.Interpreting the decision in a most restrictive or conservative manner, we find in the record of this case the positive necessity for resorting to the lump sum award.The facts of this case clearly demonstrate the wife's need for alimony.The husband, however, is not in a position to pay periodic or rehabilitative alimony as he earns only $214 per week.Simple arithmetic shows that after paying $325 per month in child support and meeting the other financial obligations imposed upon the husband by the final judgment, such as medical and dental expenses, insurance premiums, payment of debts, and attorneys fees, there is little enough left for alimony, let alone his own living expenses.On the other hand, he owns an undivided one-half interest in the Pine Knob property, which could be used to meet that...