ROBERT B. ATKINS, APPELLANT,
v.
MARGARET O'CONNOR ATKINS, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In a marriage dissolution case, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed an award of rehabilitative alimony to the former wife but affirmed the attorney's fees award. The court held that the wife, who was earning $16,000 annually as a pharmaceutical sales representative (twice her prior earnings), did not need rehabilitation and therefore was not entitled to rehabilitative alimony.
The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding rehabilitative alimony because the wife did not require rehabilitation—she was at the apex of her career with earnings twice her previous income. The court affirmed the attorney's fees award, finding no abuse of discretion.
[1] Rehabilitative alimony is awarded to restore a person to a former capacity, assuming a capacity for self-support that has been underdeveloped or lost during marriage.
[2] Rehabilitative alimony should be limited in amount and duration to that necessary to maintain the recipient through training or retraining.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Rehabilitative alimony is awarded to restore a person to a former capacity. In making such an award the court assumes a person has a capacity for self support which has been underdeveloped or completely lost during marriage.”
Establishes the definition and purpose of rehabilitative alimony
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe parties were married for approximately six years with no children. The husband is an ophthalmologist earning $25,000–$33,000 per year and is 43 ye…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Capacity For Self-Support cases and more on FLexlaw
[*523] DOWNEY, Chief Judge.
Robert Atkins, Appellant in a marriage dissolution action seeks reversal of those portions of a final judgment of dissolution that required him to pay appellee, Margaret Atkins, (1) rehabilitative alimony of $500 per month for two years and (2) attorney’s fees.
The evidence the parties presented shows the following material things. The marriage lasted approximately six years. The parties had no children. Appellant is a medical doctor specializing in ophthamology and earning $25,000 to $33,000 per year. Appellee has a Bachelor’s degree in History and a Master’s degree in Library Science. Throughout the marriage she worked in various capacities, namely, medical'librarian, teacher in the public school system and pharmaceutical sales representative. Ap-pellee’s work as a librarian and teacher paid so poorly that appellee entered the selling field. As a sales representative for a pharmaceutical house she earned approximately $16,000 annually at the time of trial. The appellee was 34 years of age and in good health, while the appellant was 43 and had some health problems.
We have examined the record and briefs carefully in order to find any evidentiary support for an award of alimony, specifically rehabilitative alimony, and we are unable to find a predicate therefor. Thus, it is our opinion that the facts of this case do not justify an award of any alimony to appellee. But in any event, rehabilitative alimony is especially inappropriate under these circumstances. Rehabilitative alimony is awarded to restore a person to a former capacity.1 In making such an award the court assumes a person has a capacity for self support which has been underdeveloped or completely lost during marriage.2 Rehabilitative alimony should be limited in amount and duration to that necessary to maintain the recipient through training or retraining.3 Such an award is an incentive to assist one in reclaiming employment skills which have atrophied during the marriage.4
Insofar as her earnings are concerned, the appellee is at the apex of her career. Her present income of $16,000 annually as a sales representative is twice the income she had previously derived from any of her other varied occupations. Appellee simply needed no rehabilitation. Thus, we hold that the trial judge abused his discretion in awarding the appellee rehabilitative alimony.
With regard to the award of attorney’s fees, the appellant has failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion.
Accordingly, we reverse the award of rehabilitative alimony and affirm the final judgment in all other respects.
REVERSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.
ANSTEAD and MOORE, JJ., concur. . Rebach v. Rebach, 296 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1974); Robinson v. Robinson, 366 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
. Ibid.
. Ibid.
. Robinson v. Robinson, supra at fn. 2.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Longo v. Longo, 533 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)…p potential supportive skills. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 [*793] So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980). Rehabilitative alimony “should be limited in amount and duration to that necessary to maintain the recipient through training or retraining.” Atkins v. Atkins, 380 So. 2d 522, 523 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 389 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 1980). Although the wife was a homemaker during most of the marriage and had only a high school education, she testified that she was currently employed as the manager of the tennis pro shop a…
-
Ursula K. Hobart v. Hobart, 512 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…l bring her to any level of self-sufficiency. Rehabilitative alimony presupposes a potential for self-support that has been undeveloped or completely lost during the marriage. Holland v. Holland, 406 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Atkins v. Atkins, 380 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). Rehabilitative alimony is appropriate only where the evidence suggests the wife can be raised to a financial stature that would permit her to become self-supporting. Allison v. Allison, 491 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) [*994]…
-
Atkins v. Atkins, 388 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…PER CURIAM. We previously reversed a final judgment in this cause, Fla.App., 380 So. 2d 522, allowing the appellee wife rehabilitative alimony. We held that the wife was not entitled to any type of alimony. Appellant then moved in the trial court to vacate the rehabilitative alimony provision contained in the final judgment. He also sought…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Reback v. Reback, 296 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Robinson v. Robinson, 366 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)