Shaw v. Shaw, Case No. 2D18-331
Decision Date | 31 May 2019 |
Docket Number | Case No. 2D18-331 |
Parties | Carmen Lucena SHAW, Appellant, v. Kim L. SHAW, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Chrystal R. Koch of Koch Law Firm, Sarasota for Appellant.
No appearance for Appellee.
Carmen Shaw (the Former Wife) appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. Among the points she has raised, the Former Wife argues that, at a minimum, the trial court should have awarded her nominal permanent alimony following the dissolution of the parties' twenty-eight-year marriage. Under the facts of this case, we must agree.
The trial court found that the Former Wife, a licensed veterinarian, had only ever worked part time during the marriage and had been the primary caregiver for the parties' three minor children. The Former Wife was unemployed by the time the trial in this case concluded. According to the final judgment, the anticipated income the Former Wife "is likely to have" is approximately half of that which Kim Shaw (the Former Husband) actually earns. Recognizing this disparity and the Former Wife's employment circumstances, the trial court awarded her bridge-the-gap alimony and durational alimony. One could argue that a more comprehensive alimony award might have been appropriate under section 61.08, Florida Statutes (2018), but we cannot say the trial court abused its discretion in fashioning the Former Wife's overall alimony award in the way that it did. See Librizzi v. Librizzi, 228 So. 3d 593, 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) ; Johnson v. Johnson, 454 So. 2d 797, 799 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) ( ).
However, as we have explained before, a trial court should ordinarily award nominal permanent alimony in cases such as the one before us because doing so "will allow the trial court to increase the alimony award should the [w]ife find that she is unable to secure employment, after using her best efforts, in the imputed amount." See Schlagel v. Schlagel, 973 So. 2d 672, 676-77 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). An "award of nominal permanent alimony ‘will permit the wife to petition the trial court to pursue a future increase in permanent alimony should she continue to be unable to work’ "and "will preserve the jurisdiction of the trial court to revisit the matter as the parties go on with their new lives." Id. at 676 (quoting Nourse v. Nourse, 948 So. 2d 903, 904 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) ); see also Banks v. Banks, 168 So. 3d 273, 276 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Brinkmann v. Petro Welt Trading Ges.M.B.H
... ... 90.5055(3). And, in this case, it is unclear whether the magistrate considered whether Gruber was ... ...
-
Majab Dev., LLC v. Petro Welt Trading Ges.M.B.H
... ... and SMITH, JJ., Concur.--------Notes:1 Whether the facts of this case establish a waiver of that statutory privilege is a question for the trial ... ...
-
E. Bay NC, LLC v. Estate of Djadjich by and Through Reddish
... ... REDDISH, Personal Representative, Respondent.Case No. 2D18-3604District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.Opinion ... ...
-
Alimony and support
...to meet the needs of the recipient spouse. In a long-term marriage, the trend is that nominal alimony must be awarded. [ Shaw v. Shaw , 273 So. 3d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)(holding the trial court abused its discretion in denying wife nominal permanent alimony in a 28-year marriage, where she......
-
Final judgment; rehearing; motions related to judgment
...to later modify the amount of alimony upon petition should the financial circumstances of the payor spouse improve. [ Shaw v. Shaw , 273 So. 3d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)(holding that an award of nominal permanent alimony will permit the wife to petition the trial court to pursue a future incr......