JUDITH G. FLIGELMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
DANIEL L. FLIGELMAN, 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.
In this divorce appeal, the wife challenged the trial court's denial of her claimed equity in the marital residence and the adequacy of alimony and attorney's fees awards. The appellate court affirmed most of the judgment but increased the periodic alimony from $25 to $50 per week, finding the original award inadequate given the 23-year marriage, the husband's substantial assets of approximately $200,000, and the wife's minimal earning capacity.
The appellate court affirmed the judgment regarding the residence, child support, and attorney's fees but reversed and modified the periodic alimony award, increasing it from $25 per week to $50 per week until the wife's remarriage or death, with the increase retroactive to the divorce judgment date.
[1] A court may modify a divorce judgment to increase periodic alimony based on changed circumstances.
[2] Periodic alimony awards in divorce actions may be made retroactive to the date of the original divorce judgment.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We affirm the judgment except for the award of periodic alimony, as to which we agree with the contention of the appellant that said award was inadequate in the circumstances.”
Establishes the core holding that the periodic alimony award was inadequate and requires modification.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe parties were married for 23 years. The wife was granted a divorce, $15,000 lump sum alimony, $50 per week child support for a minor child aged six…
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 Divorce Action cases and more on FLexlaw
In a divorce action completed prior to the effective date of the no fault divorce law (Ch. 71-241) the plaintiff wife was granted a divorce, $15,000 lump sum alimony, $50 per week support for a child of the parties aged sixteen years, and alimony of $25 per week for a limited period, to terminate when the minor should become “emancipated,” or sooner if the wife remarried. The marital residence, valued at $55,000 was owned by the husband. A claim by the wife of an equity therein was rejected by the trial court. There were two children of the marriage, one of whom had attained majority. The wife was granted custody of the minor child, above referred to, and was granted the right to continue to reside with the child in the marital residence during the minority of said child, with the husband required to pay mortgage payments, taxes, insurance and major maintenance expenses thereon. An allowance of $2,500 attorney fee was made for the services of the wife’s attorney.
On appeal therefrom by the wife it was argued the trial court erred in denying her claim of an interest or equity in the residence premises and that the awards of alimony and attorney’s fee were inadequate and represented an abuse of discretion.
We affirm the judgment except for the award of periodic alimony, as to which we agree with the contention of the appellant that said award was inadequate in the circumstances. The marriage had existed for 23 years. There was evidence that the wife had the capacity to earn money, but her earnings in recent years, as shown in the evidence, had not exceeded $300, and in one year $400. The husband was shown to have assets, including a going business, amounting to approximately $200,000.
Accordingly, the judgment is modified and amended to provide, as to the periodic alimony, that the defendant husband shall pay to the plaintiff wife alimony in the amount of $50 per week until her remarriage or death, and that such increase in the periodic alimony shall be retroactive to the date of the divorce judgment; provided, however, that either party may apply to the trial court for further modification of the judgment as to the amount of periodic alimony, based on future changes in the circumstances of the parties if such shall occur, as provided for in § 61.14 Fla. Stat., F.S.A.
The judgment appealed from is affirmed in part, reversed in part and modified and amended, as hereinabove set forth.