RICKY N. BAGLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
BRENDA K. BAGLEY, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2007-01-25
No. 1D06-0122
ALLEN and WOLF, JJ., and ERVIN, III, RICHARD W., Senior Judge, concur.
948 So. 2d 841 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2007) Caution
Cited by 12 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges an order denying a petition for modification of his alimony obligation. The appellant sought modification pursuant to section 61.14(l)(b), Florida Statutes, and he contends that because it was shown that the appellee was in a “supportive relationship” the court should not have considered the appellee’s financial need in deciding whether to modify the alimony. However, while section 61.14(l)(b)2 catalogs a nonexclusive listing of other factors for the court’s consideration, the financial circumstances remain pertinent and the court was entitled to consider the appellee’s financial need. See Donoff v. Donoff, 940 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); § 61.08(2), Fla. Stat. The appealed order is affirmed.

ALLEN and WOLF, JJ., and ERVIN, III, RICHARD W., Senior Judge, concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Buxton v. Buxton, 963 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)
    …urt must consider when determining an award of alimony, when modifying alimony under section [*956] 61.14. Donoff v. Donoff, 940 So. 2d 1221, 1223 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Mirsky v. Mirsky, 474 So. 2d 9, 9 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); see also Bagley v. Bagley, 948 So. 2d 841, 841 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). As the Donoff court explained, [I]t is apparent that the legislature has used specified “factors” or “circumstances” in chapter 61 to create standards governing the exercise of trial court discretion. These section 61.08(2…
  • Lombardo v. Haige, 971 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)
    …P. 9.110(k). Especially in light of the explanation in the order of clarification, however, it is clear that the order of dismissal was not an appealable order. See S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So. 2d 97, 99-100 (Fla.1974); DeMartino v. Simat, 948 So. 2d 841 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). The Landlord did not appeal this order. On February 1, 2006, the Tenant filed a motion to tax costs and attorneys’ fees. The content of the motion suggests that the Tenant’s counsel believed that the county court had dismissed t…
  • …is confined to the four corners of the complaint and must take as true all well-pleaded, material facts. Temples v. Fla. Indus. Constr. Co., 310 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); Gennaro v. Leeper, 313 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). DeMartino v. Simat, 948 So. 2d 841, 843 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). In an action for legal malpractice, a plaintiff must ordinarily allege and prove that he or she has privity with the attorney, that the attorney neglected a reasonable duty owed to the plaintiff, and that the attorney's negl…

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw