Searcey v. Searcey, 2D05-1311.
| Decision Date | 08 February 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D05-1311.,2D05-1311. |
| Citation | 923 So.2d 528 |
| Parties | Richard SEARCEY, Appellant, v. Deborah SEARCEY, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Amy E. Skelton of Amy E. Skelton, P.A., Lake Hamilton, for Appellant.
Karol K. Williams of Karol K. Williams, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee.
The Husband appeals the final judgment of dissolution of the parties' marriage. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The parties were married for thirty-two years. The trial court found in the final judgment that the Wife earned a gross annual income of $101,000, and it imputed a gross annual income of $11,310 to the Husband.1 It was undisputed that the Husband is uninsurable in Florida due to his severe diabetes. The Husband has a high school education. The Wife earned both a bachelor's and a master's degree during the marriage.
The trial court awarded the Husband $492 a month in permanent periodic alimony, the exact amount of its calculation of the Wife's monthly surplus. However, this court's calculations reveal that the Wife's monthly surplus exceeds $2400. At oral argument, the Wife's appellate counsel conceded a $1300 error in the Wife's financial affidavit.2 It is incumbent upon counsel and the trial court to ensure the fairness and accuracy of the parties' respective financial affidavits.
The primary criteria for a trial court to consider in determining an award of alimony are the needs of the spouse requesting the alimony and the ability of the other spouse to pay. Griffin v. Griffin, 906 So.2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). In addition, section 61.08(2), Florida Statutes (2003), sets forth relevant economic factors for trial courts to consider in determining a proper award of alimony and requires courts to make findings of fact with regard to each factor. Although the trial court in this case failed to make the required findings, the parties did not raise that failure as reversible error. Nevertheless, it is clear from the duration of the parties' marriage, the disparity in the parties' incomes, and the fact of the Husband's severe diabetes, see § 61.08(2)(b), (c) and (d), that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding the Husband only $492 a month in permanent alimony. Accordingly, we reverse the award of alimony and remand for further proceedings on that issue. Upon reconsideration of the award of alimony, the trial court should make the findings required by section 61.08(2). See Sussman v. Sussman, 915 So.2d 281 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).
In its reconsideration of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hill v. Hill
...to permanent periodic alimony must be based on the record and determined prior to entry of the final judgment); Searcey v. Searcey, 923 So. 2d 528, 530 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (finding that "[i]t is the Husband's present need and the Wife's present ability to pay that are relevant") (emphasis ad......
-
Alcantara v. Alcantara, No. 3D08-1265.
...were to return to Hawaii is not a proper consideration in determining her entitlement to permanent alimony.3 See Searcey v. Searcey, 923 So.2d 528, 530 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (finding that trial court may not consider possible future social security payments to husband in determining alimony Se......
-
Del Pino v. Del Pino
...absent compelling reasons, the decision to defer the benefits may be deemed a voluntary reduction of income). Cf. Searcey v. Searcey, 923 So.2d 528, 530 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) ("[The trial court] may not consider any possible future social security payments to the [spouse when deciding alimony]......
-
McCants v. McCants
...on remand the trial court must make the findings required by section 61.08(2), Florida Statutes (2005). See Searcey v. Searcey, 923 So.2d 528, 529-30 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Marital The Wife contends that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to award the Husband's interest in the ma......
-
Trial and evidence
...and the in-kind payments from his medical practice and include the total value of the items in his gross income. • Searcey v. Searcey, 923 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Award of $492 a month in TRIAL, EVIDENCE §19:104 Florida Family Law and Practice 19-34 permanent periodic alimony to husb......
-
Discovery and use of experts
...at the center of the system established by the Family Law Rules to resolve the issues that arise in family cases.” • Searcey v. Searcey, 923 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Award of $492 a month in permanent periodic alimony to husband was insufficient in marital dissolution proceeding; part......
-
Presuit investigation and procedures
...neither wife nor her accountant could substantiate many of the expenses she claimed were her needs alone). • Searcey v. Searcey , 923 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding an award of $492 a month in permanent periodic alimony to husband was insufficient in marital dissolution proceeding; ......
-
Screening and taking the case
...and costs. The judge needs to be educated. The judge needs your help to have competent evidence presented. CASES • Searcey v. Searcey, 923 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Award of $492 a month in permanent periodic alimony to husband was insufficient in marital dissolution proceeding; partie......