CHARLES G. STRICKLAND, APPELLANT,
v.
TERRY B. STRICKLAND, 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 court held that the amount of alimony awarded was not justified by the record and the valuation of the marital asset (veterinary practice) was unclear.
The trial court dissolved a marriage, awarding alimony and distributing marital assets. The husband appealed the alimony amount and the valuation of h…
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 Valuation Of Marital Assets cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, Chief Judge.
Charles G. Strickland timely appeals from a final judgment of dissolution. We reverse.
We agree that the wife is entitled to alimony but the record does not justify the amount awarded in this case. The trial court found that the husband had a net income of $30,000 and the wife had a net income of $20,000. It then awarded her alimony of $750 per month, giving her an annual income of $29,000 and the husband an annual income of $21,000. One seems no more reasonable than the other. Language in the Final Judgment indicates that the court might have intended to impute income to the husband but failed to do so. On remand, if the court does impute income, it must indicate the amount imputed as well as the source of such income. Wendroff v. Wendroff, 614 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Hogle v. Hogle, 535.So 2d 704 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988).
In the matter of the distribution of marital assets, the court awarded the husband’s veterinary practice to him and allocated it a value of “between $30,000 and $50,000” based, on the testimony of the wife’s expert. If the property is, in fact, worth $50,000, then the disparity in the wife’s favor is only about $10,000. If, however, the veterinary practice is only worth $30,000, then the disparity is too great to be sustained even under Cana-karis. For that reason, the court should tell us the value it placed on the veterinary practice.
REVERSED and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion. PETERSON, J., concurs.
DIAMANTIS, J., concurs specially, without opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Andrews v. Andrews, 867 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…v. Clause, 848 So. 2d 1268, 1271 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). See also Zubkin v. Zubkin, 823 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Batson v. Batson, 821 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Vitek v. Vitek, 661 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Strickland v. Strickland, 639 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). In determining the amount of income to impute, the court must consider the spouse’s recent work history, his or her occupational qualifications, and the prevailing earnings in the community for that class of available jobs. Clay…
-
Batson v. Batson, 821 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…alimony. In order to impute income to the husband, specific findings are required that indicate source and amount. See Smith v. Smith, 737 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Vitek v. Vitek, 661 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Strickland v. Strickland, 639 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). It is impossible to make specific findings to support imputation of income on this record due to lack of evidence of the husband’s potential earnings. Whether it is appropriate for an appellate court to remand for further eviden…
-
Paul v. Paul, 648 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…s the present ability to earn, although no amount was specified. Absent such findings made by the trial court to support an alimony award in this case, we cannot sensibly review this portion of the dissolution judgment. See Strickland v. Strickland, 639 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). Accordingly, we affirm that portion of the dissolution judgment pertaining to equitable distribution of marital assets and nonmarital assets, but we reverse the provisions relating to medical insurance premiums and medical expe…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wendroff v. Wendroff, 614 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)