Paul v. Paul

• Decision Date: 14 August 2020
• Docket Number: Case No. 5D19-2223
• Citation: 300 So.3d 811 (Mem)
• Parties: Burton John PAUL, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. Linda Faye PAUL, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

300 So.3d 811 (Mem)

Burton John PAUL, Appellant/Cross-Appellee,

v.Linda Faye PAUL, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

Case No. 5D19-2223

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed August 14, 2020

A.J. Rohe, Ill, and Rachel Bartolowits, of Rohe Law P.A., Tavares, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

Lawrence P. Cartelli, of Lawrence P. Cartelli, P.A., Tavares, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Burton John Paul, Former Husband, appeals an amended final judgment of dissolution of marriage, challenging the equitable distribution scheme, the alimony award, the requirement that Former Husband obtain life insurance to secure the alimony, the calculation of child support, and the attorney's fee award.Appellee, Linda Faye Paul, Former Wife, cross-appeals.We have carefully reviewed the record and the amended final judgment in light of Former Husband's points on appeal, and we find merit in three of his arguments.We affirm on all other points raised by Former Husband, and we affirm as to Former Wife's cross-appeal without further discussion.

First, Former Husband argues that the trial court erred in calculating alimony because it failed to make a specific finding as to his total net income.Instead, the trial court made a finding only as to Former Husband's social security income, failing to include Former Husband's business income from his 95% ownership interest in his closely held corporation.This was error.Velez v. Montalvo-Velez , 253 So. 3d 117, 120(Fla. 2d DCA2018)("It is well-established that the trial court must determine each spouse's [net] income for purposes of alimony ...."(citation omitted)).On remand, the trial court must make a specific finding concerning Former Husband's business income and recalculate the alimony award based on Former Husband's total net income.

Second, Former Husband argues that the trial court erred by requiring him to maintain a life insurance policy.Former Wife properly concedes...