ALLEN ZIMERLE, FORMER HUSBAND, APPELLANT,
v.
ANNIE ZIMERLE, FORMER WIFE, 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 references to circumstances predating a prior alimony modification order are permissible if they are historical and not the basis for the current modification.
Former Wife sought an upward modification of alimony, which the trial court granted. Former Husband appealed, arguing the court improperly considered …
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 Change In Circumstances cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on appeal from an order granting the Former Wife’s 1993 alimony modification petition. The parties were divorced in 1974, whereupon Former Husband was ordered to pay $25 per month in permanent alimony to Former Wife. In 1979, Former Wife petitioned for, and was granted, an upward modification in her alimony award to $50 per month. In 1993, Former Wife again petitioned for, and again was granted, an upward modification in her alimony award to $400 per month.
Former Husband now appeals the order granting Former Wife’s 1993 modification petition, arguing that the trial court reversibly erred by erroneously considering evidence of matters which predated the granting of Former Wife’s 1979 modification petition. See Johnson v. Johnson, 537 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (holding that an alimony modification can be based only on circumstances changed since the prior award), rev. denied, 544 So. 2d 200 (Fla.1989); Hosford v. Hosford, 362 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (holding that “[o]nce the court has found sufficient change in circumstances to require modification and thereupon enters an order, the facts and circumstances supporting that modification may not be revisited by this court as a basis for further modification.”).
We disagree. Although the order at issue indeed references circumstances predating the 1979 modification, we find that these references are merely historical in nature and do not form the basis of the present upward modification. To the contrary, the record before us supports the trial court’s conclusion “that the [former] husband has an ability to contribute to an increase in alimony, that there has been a substantial change in his ability and that there has been a substantial change in the [former] wife’s need” since the 1979 modification. Bedell v. Bedell, 583 So. 2d 1005 (Fla.1991). We, therefore, AFFIRM.
BOOTH, JOANOS and MINER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Diane v. Bedell, 583 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 1991)
- James v. James, 537 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)
- Nova v. State, 362 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Hosford v. Hosford, 362 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)