JEAN HARMON, APPELLANT,
v.
JEFFREY S. HARMON, 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.
The trial court erred in ruling as a matter of law that a settlement agreement providing for alimony could not be modified based upon a substantial change in circumstances.
Appellant sought modification of alimony based on a substantial change in circumstances. The trial court ruled as a matter of law that the settlement …
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 Waiver Of Alimony cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
REVERSED. We agree with appellant that the trial court erred in ruling as a matter of law that the settlement agreement of the parties, which provided for alimony and support for the appellant, could not be modified based upon a substantial change in circumstances.
In Florida, the statutory right to modification, unless specifically waived, is incorporated as a matter of law in any agreement or judgment providing for alimony. See Putnam v. Putnam, 226 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 234 So. 2d 118 (Fla.1969). There was no waiver of the right to seek modification contained in the agreement, and, since the agreement itself provided for support, the court erred in concluding that a boilerplate waiver of alimony contained in the agreement constituted a waiver of either alimony or a modification thereof. In fact, the agreement also provided specifically for a possible modification should the appellant’s income be increased.
Our reversal does not mean that the court may not consider the circumstances existing at the time of the agreemént, and the intent of the parties, in construing the agreement and determining the issues raised by the petition for modification. For instance, the parties’ actual knowledge of a particular asset might be relevant in determining whether that asset was considered in making the agreement.
Since there was a trial, and a transcript thereof exists, we authorize the trial court on remand to determine within its discretion whether a new trial is needed, or whether the case can be resolved upon consideration of the existing transcript. The parties should, at a minimum, be permitted to appear before the court and argue their respective positions. There must be a new hearing, of course, if the parties assert on remand that there has been a further change in circumstances.
ANSTEAD, GUNTHER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Quillen v. Quillen, 247 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
-
Rosenthal v. Rosenthal, 199 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…circumstances or the financial ability of either party changes.” “In Florida, the statutory right to modification, unless specifically waived, is incorporated as a matter of law in any agreement or judgment providing for alimony.” Harmon v. Harmon, 629 So. 2d 1011, 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). The right to modify awarded alimony may be waived by either party, and this waiver may be implied; however, an implied waiver must be clear and unambiguous: “ ‘Parties to a marriage may waive their statutory right to seek…
-
Adele Ispass v. Ispass, 243 So. 3d 453 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)…t the alimony payments would cease on her sixty-second birthday. "In Florida, the statutory right to modification, unless specifically waived, is incorporated as a matter of law in any agreement or judgment providing for alimony." Harmon v. Harmon , 629 So. 2d 1011, 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). "The right to modify awarded alimony may be waived by either party, and this waiver may be implied; however, an implied waiver must be clear and unambiguous." Rosenthal v. Rosenthal , 199 So. 3d 541, 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Putnam v. Putnam, 226 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)
- Hall v. Fla. State Dep't of Pub. Welf., 234 So. 2d 118 (Fla. 1969)
- Moses v. Besco Elec. Supply Co., 234 So. 2d 118 (Fla. 1969)