LUIS JAVIER DIAZ, APPELLANT,
v.
ZORAYA BECERRA DIAZ, 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 statutory limit on durational alimony cannot be exceeded, even under exceptional circumstances.
The former husband appealed a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, arguing issues with alimony and equitable distribution. The appellate court c…
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 Durational Alimony cases and more on FLexlaw
The former husband appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. In the absence of a transcript of the final hearing or a statement of the evidence prepared in accordance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200, we are unable to evaluate the former husband’s arguments that the award of any durational alimony was erroneous and that the equitable distribution of the former husband’s bank account was unsupported by the record. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1979).
We do, however, find one issue raised by the former husband to be meritorious and apparent on the face of the final judgment. The parties were married for three years and four months (measured from the date of marriage to the date the petition for dissolution was filed, as specified by section 61.08(4), Florida Statutes (2010)).1 Section 61.08(7) specifies that the length of an award of durational alimony “may not be modified except under exceptional circumstances and may not exceed the length of'the marriage.” We reject the former wife’s argument that under exceptional circumstances, the term of an award of durational alimony may exceed the duration of the marriage. This “equitable” argument fails because of the clarity of the statute.
We affirm the final judgment of dissolution of marriage in all respects except one. That portion of the award of durational alimony setting the term of the monthly payments at 48 months is reversed and remanded for a reduction to 40 months, the statutory limit.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for reduction of the term of durational alimony.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Onthonio Whyte v. Valentina Eckert Whyte (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)…lorida Statues (2019), provides that “the length of an award of durational alimony may not be modified except under exceptional circumstances and may not exceed the length of the marriage.” Id. (emphasis added). Our sister court in Diaz v. Diaz, 152 So. 3d 743 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014), rejected an “equitable” argument that “under exceptional circumstances, the term of an award of durational alimony may exceed the duration of the marriage.” Id. at 744. Recognizing that it was not at liberty to disregard the plai…
-
Onthonio Whyte v. Valentina Eckert Whyte (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)…Florida Statues (2019), provides that “the length of an award of durational alimony may not be modified except under exceptional circumstances and may not exceed the length of the marriage.” Id. (emphasis added). Our sister court in Diaz v. Diaz, 152 So. 3d 743 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014), rejected an “equitable” argument that “under exceptional circumstances, the term of an award of durational alimony may exceed the duration of the marriage.” Id. at 744. Recognizing that it was not at liberty to disregard the pl…
-
Aleksei Nikolaev v. Ekaterina Nikolaeva (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)