BLUE SATANONCHAI, APPELLANT,
v.
AMPARO SATANONCHAI, 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.
An award of lump sum alimony that forces one spouse into relative impoverishment constitutes an abuse of discretion.
The trial court awarded the marital home, the parties' sole asset, to the wife as lump sum alimony. This award forced the husband from a modest econom…
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 Equitable Distribution Of Marital Assets cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
As in Harris v. Harris, 498 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), Rico v. Rico, 487 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), and Hiler v. Hiler, 442 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), the effect of awarding the marital home— the parties’ sole asset — to the wife as lump sum alimony was to force the husband from his modest economic status to a state of relative impoverishment. Cf. Casto v. Casto, 458 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (lump sum alimony award to wife proper where husband’s considerable net worth greatly exceeds that of his wife), approved, 508 So. 2d 330 (Fla.1987). A distribution of marital property that creates such an inequitable impact constitutes an abuse of discretion. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980).
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding child support, rehabilitative alimony, and attorney’s fees to the appellee-wife. However, in light of our reversal on the award of lump sum alimony, on remand the trial court may reconsider the amount and duration of the award for rehabilitative alimony. Rico, 487 So. 2d at 1162; Kuehn v. Orlosky, 470 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (on remand court may modify other provisions of final judgment to do justice and equity to overall scheme).
Additionally, the court should award the wife exclusive use and possession of the home until the children reach majority and make the appropriate rulings concerning mortgage payments, maintenance, and taxes. Harris, 498 So. 2d at 1047; Bullard v. Bullard, 413 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further consistent proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Polley v. Polley, 588 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…to the husband.7 Soll v. Soll, 560 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Bergstrom v. Bergstrom, 559 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 574 So. 2d 139 (Fla.1990); Zachary v. Zachary, 551 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Cobb; Satanonchai v. Satanonchai, 522 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); see Canakaris. On remand, the trial court is directed to award the wife half the marital home, and to provide that the wife receive a credit for half the mortgage payments, repair bills, taxes and insurance upon the sale of the m…
-
Gallardo v. Gallardo, 593 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…judgment that awarded the wife sole possession and occupancy of the marital home and remand with directions to award the wife exclusive possession of the marital home until the minor child reaches the age of majority. See Satanonchai v. Satanonchai, 522 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (trial court should have awarded wife exclusive use and occupancy of marital home until children, who were in her custody, reached age of majority); Farrington v. Farrington, 390 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (exclusive possession…
-
Jessee v. Jessee, 839 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…, Porzio v. Porzio, 760 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Bible v. Bible, 597 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Klinger v. Klinger, 570 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Savage v. Savage, 556 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); and Satanonchai v. Satanonchai, 522 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). The sole justification given for the award of the lump sum alimony was “the Husband’s intentional attempt to avoid financial obligations by intentionally putting himself in a position to be terminated.” R. 123. However, this fact…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)
- Casto v. Casto, 508 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 1987)
- RICO v. Rosario RICO, 487 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Bullard v. Altha Elaine Bullard, 413 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Hiler v. Hiler, 442 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Casto v. Casto, 458 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Harris v. Romenita Harris, 498 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Kuehn v. Orlosky, 470 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)