Sketo v. Sketo

• Decision Date: 16 October 1992
• Citation: 608 So.2d 759
• Parties: Christine S. SKETO v. William Edward SKETO. 2910343.
• Court: Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

Page 759

608 So.2d 759

Christine S. SKETO v. William Edward SKETO.

2910343.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

Oct. 16, 1992.

John Emory Waddell and Ron Storey, Dothan, for appellant.

Richard H. Ramsey IV, Dothan, for appellee.

RUSSELL, Judge.

After an ore tenus proceeding, the trial court divorced the parties, awarded the husband all the real property owned by the parties, and awarded the wife $2,500 as alimony in gross. The wife appeals, contending that the trial court erred in awarding the marital home and all the real property to the husband. We reverse and remand.

We note at the outset that an award of alimony in gross is to effect a final termination of the property rights of the parties and is also an approximate appraisal of the present value of the wife's future support. Rogers v. Rogers, 473 So.2d 537 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). There is no mathematical formula for the determination of the amount of alimony in gross, but the facts of each case must be considered. Tims v. Tims, 519 So.2d 558 (Ala.Civ.App.1987). The award of alimony is a matter within the discretion of the trial court, and its determination will not be set aside absent an abuse of that discretion. Cliett v. Cliett, 564 So.2d 997 (Ala.Civ.App.1990).

Additionally, while the division of property is not required to be equal, it must be equitable. Brannon v. Brannon, 477 So.2d 445 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). Although it is not the function of this court to substitute its judgment for that of the trial court, Lewis v. Lewis, 494 So.2d 105 (Ala.Civ.App.1986), the trial court's judgment may be reviewed and revised by this court. Seamon v. Seamon, 587 So.2d 333 (Ala.Civ.App.1991).

The record reveals that the parties were married on November 1, 1980, and that both had been married previously. The husband owned the marital home and lot and three other lots prior to the marriage. Three of the lots were paid for prior to the marriage, but there was a mortgage on the marital home, with $3,000 or $4,000 remaining to be paid at the time of the hearing.

In March 1982 the husband conveyed joint title to the marital home and the lots to the wife and himself. He agreed when testifying that he transferred the property to joint ownership because the parties were married and because both incomes were being used for the benefit of the family. In February 1983 two additional lots were conveyed to the husband and the wife by deed. The wife testified that these two lots were purchased after the marriage and that she paid one-half of their purchase price. The husband testified that he purchased these two lots in 1978 and finished paying for them in February or March 1983. He stated that $1,600 remained to be paid on the two lots when the parties married and that the wife paid approximately one-third of that amount.

The wife further testified that between the time of the marriage in 1980 and 1987, the funds to purchase the last two lots and to pay the mortgage on the house and lot were taken from the joint account to which both parties contributed. She stated that she paid the bills and that the husband began handling the bills in 1987 primarily with his funds. She also stated that after the marriage, she sold the house that she had owned when she married...