JEFFREY C. GURNEY, APPELLANT,
v.
SUSAN M. GURNEY, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2002-01-18
No. 5D01-1968
PETERSON, GRIFFIN and PLEUS, JJ., concur.
804 So. 2d 601 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2002) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. Several issues were raised, but, with one exception, we affirm.1 Appellee acknowledges there is no record basis for inclusion of appellant’s per diem pay as income. We reject appel-lee’s argument that the error is de minim-is. Accordingly, we remand to the lower court for recalculation of child support and alimony using the correct income figure.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part and REMANDED.

PETERSON, GRIFFIN and PLEUS, JJ., concur. . Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Valentine v. van Sickle, 42 So. 3d 267 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
    …ability to pay alimony. The per diem reimbursements should not be included in the Husband’s monthly income for the purpose of calculating his income unless the receipt of that money is shown to reduce personal living expenses. See Gurney v. Gurney, 804 So. 2d 601, 601 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). As previously noted, the Husband erroneously included his per diem reimbursements on a line in his financial affidavit that is reserved for reimbursed expenses “to the extent that they reduce personal living expenses.” Unde…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw