MARVIN E. GAY, APPELLANT,
v.
JOANNE J. GAY, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Equitable Distribution cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the final judgment in this dissolution of marriage case except in two respects.
We reverse the award to the wife of one-half of the husband’s disability plan •'under which the husband is entitled to $73.00 per month. See Freeman v. Freeman, 468 So. 2d 326, 328 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (“A disability pension ... is not a marital asset for purposes of equitable distribution.”). We do not agree with the wife’s argument that Freeman was effectively overruled by Weisfeld v. Weisfeld, 545 So. 2d 1341 (Fla.1989). See Weisfeld, 545 So. 2d at 1346.
We reverse the requirements in the final judgment that the husband provide the wife with health insurance coverage and pay one-half of any deductible or non-covered medical expenses. Neither of those requirements contains a limitation as to the maximum costs thereof to the husband. See Richards v. Richards, 477 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Miller v. Miller, 466 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). Upon remand the trial court should fix reasonable limitations on the maximum costs to the husband of those requirements.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.
LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kremer v. Kremer, 595 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…While such a requirement is generally within the trial court’s discretion, see Burgess v. Burgess, 576 So. 2d 1348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), there should be “reasonable limitations on the maximum costs to the husband of [that] requirement[].” Gay v. Gay, 573 So. 2d 180, 181 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). No such limitations were provided for here. See also Perez v. Perez, 539 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Jones v. Jones, 493 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Richards v. Richards, ill So. 2d 620 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Miller v.…
-
Cozier v. Varry M. Cozier, 819 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…ion of the rehabilitative alimony period. Although this was within the trial court’s discretion, this was error where the trial court did not set a reasonable limitation on the maximum cost to the husband of obtaining said insurance. See Gay v. Gay, 573 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Accordingly, we reverse this requirement in the final judgment. On remand, the trial court shall set a maximum cost on this obligation. We affirm the final judgment in all other respects. On remand, in accordance with this opini…
-
Bissell v. Bissell, 622 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…nt plan, this court has very recently held [*534] that the reasoning therein can be applied equally to a vested pension plan. Kirkland v. Kirkland, 618 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). . However, we nonetheless disagree with husband that Gay v. Gay, 573 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) requires there be evidence in this case of the cost of medical insurance for the parties' child. Gay was predicated on two earlier decisions from the Fifth District in which the husbands in those cases were ordered to pay all of t…
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
- Weisfeld v. Weisfeld, 545 So. 2d 1341 (Fla. 1989)
- Miller v. Miller, 466 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Freeman v. Freeman, 468 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Richards v. Richards, 477 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)