SHIRLEY H. ST. LAURENT, APPELLANT,
v.
LEWIS S. ST. LAURENT, 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 divorce appeal, the Florida Second District Court of Appeal held that a trial judge abused his discretion by awarding the wife rehabilitative alimony for only two years when she lacked the capacity to become self-supporting by that time. The court reversed the rehabilitative alimony designation and made the alimony and medical expense contributions permanent.
The court held that the trial judge abused his discretion by designating the wife's alimony as rehabilitative and terminable after two years. Rehabilitative alimony requires a potential for self-support, and the record did not support a conclusion that the wife would be able to earn sufficient income within two years. The wife's alimony of $600 per month and the medical expense contribution were made permanent.
[1] An award of rehabilitative alimony is an abuse of discretion when the recipient spouse lacks the potential for self-support.
[2] Rehabilitative alimony requires a recipient spouse to have a capacity to which they can be rehabilitated.
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 presupposes the potential for self-support. Without this capacity, there is nothing to which one can be rehabilitated.”
Establishes the fundamental legal requirement for rehabilitative alimony awards
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 in their early 40s and married approximately 14 years with three children. The husband is an attorney and financial investor with ear…
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 Change In Circumstances cases and more on FLexlaw
DANAHY, Judge.
We hold that the trial judge abused his discretion in designating portions of the wife’s alimony awards as rehabilitative and terminable at the end of two years.
The parties are in their early 40’s and were married approximately fourteen years. They have three children. The husband is an attorney and financial investor, and the trial judge found that he has the present capability of earning approximately $55,000 per year. The trial judge also found that the wife, who has worked, is capable of earning approximately $6,000 annually. Among other financial arrangements in the final judgment, the trial judge required the husband to pay rehabilitative alimony to the wife in the amount of $600 per month for a period of two years. Thereafter, the husband’s rehabilitative alimony obligation is to terminate and the husband is to pay the wife the sum of $300 per month as permanent periodic alimony. The trial judge also required the husband to pay one-half the wife’s reasonable and necessary medical expenses for a period of two years.
The trial judge thus tacitly found that, in addition to his other obligations under the final judgment, the husband has the ability to pay the wife the sum of $600 per month and to contribute to payment of her medical expenses, and the wife has a need for such assistance. The record supports that determination. The record does not support the trial judge’s determination that the wife’s alimony should be partially rehabilitative in nature.
As we have pointed out, rehabilitative alimony presupposes the potential for self-support. Without this capacity, there is nothing to which one can be rehabilitated. Lash v. Lash, 307 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). Nothing in the record before us suggests that the wife may be able, in two years’ time, to earn an income sufficient to support herself in a style reasonably commensurate with that which she enjoyed during the marriage. Under these circumstances, an award of rehabilitative alimony is an abuse of discretion. The husband should be required to assist in the wife’s support on a permanent basis, subject always to the right of obtaining relief under changed circumstances. We, of course, do not rule out the possibility that some time in the future the wife might earn a much greater income than $6,000. That possibility, however, is purely speculative and it does not justify the trial judge’s action in designating a part of the wife’s alimony award as rehabilitative in nature. In re Marriage of Jones, 357 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978).
The wife challenges the final judgment in other respects, which we have considered and found to be without merit.
Accordingly, we reverse the final judgment with directions that the wife’s alimony of $600 per month be made permanent, and the husband’s obligation to pay one-half the wife’s reasonable medical expenses be made permanent. We affirm the final judgment in all other respects.
REVERSED in part, AFFIRMED in part, and REMANDED with directions.
BOARDMAN, A. C. J., and GRIMES, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Lash v. Lash, 307 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)
- In re the Marriage OF Barbara E. Jones, 357 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)