BERTHA MILLER IVANHOE, APPELLANT/CROSS APPELLEE,
v.
JAMES IVANHOE, APPELLEE/CROSS APPELLANT
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.
The court held that the antenuptial agreement's clear language waived the wife's right to alimony, and therefore the trial court erred in awarding permanent alimony. The court affirmed the upholding of the agreement itself.
The parties entered into an antenuptial agreement where the husband agreed to pay the wife $10,000 as a settlement in full of all rights, including al…
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 Waiver Of Alimony cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., Judge.
Appellant/wife appeals from a final judgment dissolving the marriage and upholding an antenuptial agreement. Appel-lee/husband cross-appeals an award of permanent alimony.
We find there was substantial, competent evidence to sustain the trial court’s decision to uphold the agreement and AFFIRM. The question raised by the cross-appeal presents us with a more difficult question. The agreement contained a provision which obligated the husband to pay the wife the sum of $10,000. The trial judge found that this was, in effect, the payment “for, or instead of, support, maintenance or alimony,” and that there had been a significant change in circumstances. Therefore, husband should be required to pay permanent alimony. We reluctantly disagree and REVERSE.
The agreement clearly stated, “the sum of ($10,000) Dollars as a settlement in fall of any and all rights and interest resulting from the marriage, including alimony . . .. ” (Emphasis added.)
A party, by agreement, may waive all right to alimony. Kirkconnell v. Kirkconnell, 222 So. 2d 441 (Fla.2d DCA 1969). The language of this agreement clearly designated the $10,000 as settlement in full of all rights to alimony. We therefore reverse the portion of the judgment requiring payment of permanent alimony.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part.
ORFINGER and COBB, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
August Urbanek v. Urbanek, 484 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)…niformly find that a right to alimony may never be waived. However, the law is to the con- . trary. Id. at 703. The rule that “[a] party, by agreement, may waive all right to alimony” was also recognized by the fifth district in Ivanhoe v. Ivanhoe, 397 So. 2d 410, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), where the court held that the provisions of an antenuptial agreement for $10,000 to be paid to the wife as full settlement of all rights, including alimony, constituted a waiver of the wife’s right to any additional payment…
-
Hahn v. Hahn, 465 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)…d DCA 1980). The basic rule of Florida law, of course, is that a spouse may waive her right to alimony of any type (although not [*1354] child support, absent court approval) through an antenuptial or post-nuptial agreement. See Ivanhoe v. Ivanhoe, 397 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Kirkconnell v. Kirkconnell, 222 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). Such a waiver does not contravene public policy. Kilpatrick v. McLouth, 392 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). In Belcher v. Belcher, 271 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1972), the Flor…1 / 2
-
Baker v. Alyce F. Baker, 622 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…alimony. See Cladis v. Cladis, 512 So. 2d 271, 273-74 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (holding that a finding by the trial court that an antenuptial agreement is unfair and inequitable is not sufficient by itself to set aside the agreement); Ivanhoe v. Ivanhoe, 397 So. 2d 410, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (recognizing that a party may waive the right to alimony in an antenuptial agreement); Turner v. Turner, 383 So. 2d 700, 703 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 392 So. 2d 1381 (Fla. 1980) (finding that the public policy of Flori…
Authorities Cited
- Kirkconnell v. Kirkconnell, 222 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)