MARION ELAINE HITT, APPELLANT/CROSS APPELLEE,
v.
ROBERT ARDEN HITT, 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 an automatic reduction in alimony based on the husband reaching a certain age is improper without evidence of the wife's future financial change.
The former husband appealed aspects of a dissolution judgment, including the award of permanent alimony to the former wife which was to be automatical…
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 Permanent Periodic Alimony cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The former husband appeals various aspects of the final disposition of this dissolution of a long-term marriage. The former wife has filed a cross appeal. We find no merit in the points raised in the main appeal.
The former wife was awarded the sum of $2,200 per month as permanent, periodic alimony. Upon the former husband attaining the age of sixty years, this amount was to be automatically reduced to $1,100 per month.
As we have previously held, it is error to provide for an automatic, future change or termination of alimony based upon the anticipated occurrence of a future event. Davidson v. Davidson, 410 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). We note, without deciding, that there may be exceptions to this rule. See Rao v. Rao, 501 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). It is reasonably clear, however, that there can be no provision for an automatic change in the amount of alimony awarded unless the evidence supports a finding that the receiving spouse’s financial position will in fact change in the future. Antonini v. Antonini, 473 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), rev. denied, 484 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1986); Sever v. Sever, 467 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Eskridge v. Eskridge, 381 So. 2d 754, 755 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); Garrison v. Garrison, 380 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). There was no such evidence before the court in this case.
We affirm the judgments appealed with the exception of the final paragraph of section 4 of the AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT OF DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE which, upon remand, shall be stricken.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; REMANDED.
HERSEY, C.J., POLEN, J., and RIVKIND, LEONARD, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bart L. Segall v. Segall, 708 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…milton v. Hamilton, 552 So. 2d 929, 932 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)(reversed provision of final judgment awarding as permanent alimony 50 percent of husband’s future net annual raises and 35 percent of future bonuses). This court recognized in Hitt v. Hitt, 571 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), that "there can be no provision for an automatic change in the amount of alimony awarded unless the evidence supports a finding that the receiving spouse’s financial position will in fact change in the future.” Id. at 80 (emphas…
-
Lanier v. Lanier, 594 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…(Fla. 2nd DCA 1986) (automatic reduction in alimony may be upheld when precisely drawn and conditioned upon a specifically identified occurrence); Antonini v. Antonini, 473 So. 2d 739 (1st DCA 1985), rev. den., 484 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1986); Hitt v. Hitt, 571 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). The wife was awarded sole ownership of the marital home, valued at more than $80,000 with an equity of about $35,000 and payments of $554. She also received certain household furnishings, a paid-for 1984 car, and $12,500 from a…
-
Pagano v. Pagano, 665 So. 2d 370 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…ts, we affirm. We note, concerning the court’s rehabilitative support scheme in which the amount of alimony is reduced from $2,000 per month to $1,000 per month after the first three years, that we have considered but deem inapplicable Hitt v. Hitt, 571 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). In Hitt, we recognized that a judgment may not provide for an automatic change in permanent alimony at some future date absent proof that an anticipated future event or change in circumstances will occur. Here, there is no cert…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Garrison v. Garrison, 380 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- Sever v. Sever, 467 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Elisabetta La Monaca Antonini v. Antonini, 473 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Davidson v. Murray Davidson, 410 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Bala RAO v. Charulata RAO, 501 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- Eskridge v. Eskridge, 381 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)