Waskin v. Waskin

• Decision Date: 07 June 1977
• Docket Number: No. 76-403,76-403
• Citation: Waskin v. Waskin, 346 So.2d 1060 (Fla. App. 1977)
• Parties: Gloria WASKIN, Appellant, v. Robert R. WASKIN, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 1060

346 So.2d 1060

Gloria WASKIN, Appellant, v.Robert R. WASKIN, Appellee.

No. 76-403.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 7, 1977.

Aronovitz & Weksler, Miami, for appellant.

Retter & Sack, Miami, Berryhill, Avery, Schwenke, Williams & Scott, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

Before PEARSON and NATHAN, JJ., and CHARLES CARROLL(Ret.), Associate Judge.

PEARSON, Judge.

In this appeal from a Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage, the wife argues that the alimony and child support provisions of the judgment are grossly inadequate, and that the trial judge abused his discretion in requiring the wife to pay all of the mortgage, taxes, insurance, maintenance and repairs of the marital residence which is to be exclusively occupied by the wife and the two minor children of the marriage.A third point urges that the trial judge should have required the husband to secure the child support payments by a charge upon his life insurance.

The wife, Gloria Waskin, is twenty-seven years of age and the husband, Robert R. Waskin, is thirty years of age.The couple married in June of 1969, when the wife was a junior college student and part-time office clerk at an osteopathic hospital and the husband was a sophomore medical student at the Osteopathic College of Medicine in Chicago.The parties moved to Chicago in order for the husband to complete his medical training.The wife, at this time, obtained employment and continued to work until December of 1970, when she became pregnant.Since then, due to the fact that she has been raising the parties' two young children, the wife has not been employed.Following the husband's internship in Ohio, the parties returned to Miami where the husband took a position with a North Miami Beach osteopathic physician, where he remained for a period of one year and earned in excess of $20,000.In 1973, the parties purchased a comfortable home where they resided together until August 1, 1975.The home was well furnished with added improvements, including a swimming pool, and with all payments made by the husband through the considerable income of his ever improving osteopathic medical practice.

In 1973, the husband went into practice for himself and, during that year, earned approximately $75,000 before taxes.For the fiscal year, July, 1974, to July, 1975, the husband drew from the professional association he had formed as sole stockholder, approximately $78,000 gross income.From July, 1975, he has drawn $1,000 per week as a salary, compared with $1,500 per week drawn the previous year.The reason for this decrease in salary, according to the husband, was due mainly to some changes in the medical laws beginning in July, 1975.However, it does appear that the professional association has a profit of $18,000, which Dr. Waskin can draw from to supplement his salary.Additionally, there was a professional association pension plan contribution to the husband's pension of $6,400, and a depreciation deduction of $5,000 from which Dr. Waskin can draw cash.The professional association deducted approximately $5,800 for entertainment as well as a sum of $3,300 to cover the expense of weekly psychiatric counseling for the husband.The testimony of a certified public accountant who had visited Dr. Waskin's offices on two occasions prior to the hearing below projected, on the basis of the doctor's cash collections and the elimination of entertainment and promotional fees, that Dr. Waskin would be able to draw out the same salary that he drew out the previous year.

The parties have been accustomed to a fairly high standard of living.Their home is valued at approximately $100,000 and their furnishings at approximately $25,000.

The trial court entered a Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage, which provided that the wife be awarded custody of the two minor children, that the husband pay child support of $100 per week per child and $150 per week alimony, that the wife's tuition and book expenses at Barry College be paid for by the husband for a period of three years, that the wife should have the right to occupancy of the marital home for as long as she remains unmarried or until the children reach majority, that the wife receive the husband's interest in the Oldsmobile Cutlass, that the husband make available a life insurance policy on his life which the wife may maintain with herself as beneficiary so long as she makes the premium payments, that the husband pay for the parochial pre-school expenses for the younger child, that the husband pay the medical, dental and hospital expenses of the children, that the husband pay certain outstanding bills as well as providing the wife with medical care as a professional courtesy, and that the husband pay for major repairs to the house.Also, the judgment provided that the husband be given liberal visitation rights with the children.

The wife's first point is as follows:

"Did the court err in determining the award of alimony and child support in a dissolution of marriage judgment by failing to consider (a) the husband's ability to pay, (b) the needs of the wife and (c) the standard of living shared during the marriage?"

The...