LEE SCHWARTZ, APPELLANT,
v.
MARCIA SCHWARTZ, APPELLEE
LEE SCHWARTZ, APPELLANT,
MARCIA SCHWARTZ, APPELLEE
427 So. 2d 232
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1983)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The amount of permanent periodic alimony is excessive in the light of the evidence concerning the husband’s ability to pay, Parham v. Parham, 385 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Blum v. Blum, 382 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); the cause is therefore remanded solely for the trial court to determine a reasonable, substantially lower award. The judgment under review is otherwise entirely affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vega v. Vega, 877 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…(60 percent of net income excessive), see also Lambertini v. Lambertini, 817 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Gomez v. Gomez, 659 So. 2d 705, 706 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (excessive imputation of income; award exceeds ability to pay); Schwartz v. Schwartz, 427 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (reversing under Parham and Blum,); Scott v. Scott, 408 So. 2d 1089, 1090 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (excessive awards); Blum v. Blum, 382 So. 2d 52, 55 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (award left husband $50 per week). It is axiomatic that the court…
-
Maloy v. Maloy, 431 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…aris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980). Accordingly, we reverse and direct that the provision for weekly payments of periodic alimony be made permanent rather than rehabilitative. The judgment is affirmed in all other respects. Pace v. Pace, 427 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Colucci v. Colucci, 392 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Messer v. Messer, 342 So. 2d 1076 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Lash v. Lash, 307 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). SCHOONOVER and LEHAN, JJ., concur.…
-
Manto v. Manto, 509 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…efore, remand this matter to the trial court for the entry of an amended final judgment in which it is provided that upon the sale of the marital home the second mortgage is to be satisfied from the husband’s share of the proceeds. See Pace v. Pace, 427 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). In all other respects the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Marcoux v. Marcoux, 464 So. 2d 542 (Fla.1985). SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Blum v. Blum, 382 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Parham v. Parham, 385 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)