McLauchlin v. McLauchlin

Decision Date15 May 1991
Docket NumberNo. 90-00255,90-00255
Citation580 So.2d 812
PartiesRuth W. McLAUCHLIN, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. David D. McLAUCHLIN, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. 580 So.2d 812, 16 Fla. L. Week. D1337
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

N. David Korones, Clearwater, for appellant/cross-appellee.

Howard B. Bischoff, Bradenton, for appellee/cross-appellant.

ALTENBERND, Judge.

Both Ruth W. McLauchlin and David D. McLauchlin appeal the final judgment dissolving their marriage. The wife challenges the trial court's decisions to deny her request for permanent alimony and to impute only limited additional income to the husband. Both parties challenge the award of attorney's fees. We reverse the award of attorney's fees and affirm in all other respects.

The McLauchlins were married in 1974. They have three minor children. Their marriage did not generate significant marital assets. Both parties are employable.

During the marriage, the husband attended law school. He has been licensed to practice law in Florida since 1981. From 1981 to 1989, he practiced primarily in Manatee County. In 1988, he took a job as a part-time hearing officer. The wife maintains that this second job resulted in decreased overall earnings. A few months after the couple filed for divorce, Mr. McLauchlin moved to West Palm Beach, Florida, and accepted a job in the attorney general's office earning approximately $35,000. Shortly before the final hearing, the husband left that job and opened his own law office. As a result, his future income at the time of the final hearing was difficult to predict. The trial court chose to impute income to the husband at the level of his job with the attorney general, rather than at the somewhat higher levels he had experienced in the preceding years.

The wife is in her mid-thirties and has primary residential care of the couple's three children. She worked outside the home during part of the marriage as a secretary/office manager for her father's business and at her husband's law office. She earned approximately $20,000 annually. Neither of those jobs are options for the future. It appears that the wife is struggling to find suitable employment that will be compatible with her obligations to her children. The trial court awarded no permanent alimony and three years' rehabilitative alimony at $400 per month. Child support totals $1,110 and is based on the guidelines.

We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's decision to impute $35,000 in income to the husband. While a higher amount might have been within the trial court's discretion, this amount is clearly reasonable under all the circumstances of this case. Desilets v. Desilets, 377 So.2d 761 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). In the future, if the husband's private practice generates income above the level imputed at the final hearing, the amount of child support may be modified.

We also find no abuse concerning the decision to deny permanent alimony and to award rehabilitative alimony. Although this marriage was not a brief marriage, the wife is still young...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • O'Dell v. O'Dell
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 18, 1991
    ...Campbell, 432 So.2d 666 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).11 Abrams, 1 Florida Family Law, Sec. 31.04 at 31-13 (1991). See also, McLauchlin v. McLauchlin, 580 So.2d 812 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).12 Faulk v. Faulk, 532 So.2d 98 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Bowers v. Bowers, 497 So.2d 1357 (Fla. 4th DCA ...
  • Oxley v. Oxley
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 19, 1997
    ...v. McCauley, 599 So.2d 1002 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), Martinez-Cid v. Martinez-Cid, 559 So.2d 1177 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), and McLauchlin v. McLauchlin, 580 So.2d 812 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 591 So.2d 182 (Fla.1991), and deem each Therefore, we reverse the alimony award with direction that the co......
  • Jaffy v. Jaffy
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 27, 2007
    ...in this case very similar to those in several reported decisions where permanent alimony was deemed improper. In McLauchlin v. McLauchlin, 580 So.2d 812 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), for example, the party seeking permanent alimony was in her mid-30s and, like the spouse here, had primary residential......
  • Hinton v. Smith, 97-03510.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • November 13, 1998
    ...trial courts' imputation of income, the spouse had a track record of having earned the imputed amount. See, e.g., McLauchlin v. McLauchlin, 580 So.2d 812 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (imputing to husband previously earned income of $35,000 after he left job to open his own business); Desilets, 377 So......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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