JAMES LEE WELLS, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Kremer v. Kremer, 595 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
  …but we genuinely respect it. However, we have concluded without doubt that there was an abuse of discretion in the award of any alimony. To decide otherwise would foster indefensible inconsistencies in the law in this area. See e.g., Fulks v. Fulks, 558 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (upon dissolution of six year marriage husband’s superior earning ability did not justify permanent alimony to 40 year old wife in good health capable of continuing her premarital employment); Campbell v. Campbell, 482 So. 2d 666…
• Walker v. Walker, 818 So. 2d 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
  …ropriate is a disparate earning capacity between the spouses. Nelson, 721 So. 2d at 388-89. While the trial court has the discretion to determine whether permanent periodic alimony is appropriate under the circumstances of each case, Fulks v. Fulks, 558 So. 2d 205, 206 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), rehabilitative alimony is not a substitute for permanent periodic alimony. Campbell v. Campbell, 685 So. 2d 61, 62 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Moreover, again depending upon the circumstances of the case, permanent periodic alimony…
• Myron Lee Murray v. Murray, 598 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
  …whether permanent periodic alimony is appropriate under the circumstances of each case and that absent a clear abuse of discretion, we are not justified in substituting our judgment for the judgment of the trial court. See Canakaris; Fulks v. Fulks, 558 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). It is our responsibility, however, to determine whether the trial court abused its discretion in making that determination, and in this case we find that it did. The primary elements to be considered when determining permanent p…

Authorities Cited

• Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
• Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1988)
• Wood v. State, 544 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 1989)
• Harriel v. State, 520 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 1988)