FREDERICK WILLIAM VALLE, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Tsavaris v. Tsavaris, 307 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)
  …App.2d, 1974, 301 So. 2d 781. Further, appellee did not establish that he had suffered a substantial change in his financial circumstances. See the rationale of the decision of this court in the case of DeFrancisco v. DeFrancisco, Fla.App.2d, 1973, 273 So. 2d 780. Additionally, the record shows that during the negotiations, prior to the execution of the said agreement, the appellee insisted the lump sum alimony be paid on a regular periodic payment basis over a ten-year period, to which request the appellan…
• Freeland v. Purcifull, 347 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)
  …e of circumstances including financial circumstances of one or both of the parties must be substantial. Chastain v. Chastain, 73 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 1954); See Section 61.14(1), Florida Statutes (1975); Quinn v. Quinn, supra; DeFrancisco v. DeFrancisco, 273 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973). At the time of dissolution the wife’s earnings were approximately $8,900. The fact that she now makes $11,900 is not sufficient to bar the continued receipt of alimony payments. The mere fact of an increase in the wife’s income…
• Nan R. Young v. Young, 290 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)
  …when considering petitioner’s total income and assets. See Adams v. Adams, Fla.App.1973, 273 So. 2d 794; Tewksbury v. Tewksbury, Fla.App.1965, 178 So. 2d 346; Carmel v. Carmel, Fla.App.1973, 282 So. 2d 6; De Francisco v. De Francisco, Fla.App.1973, 273 So. 2d 780. Moreover, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate a substantial change in the needs of the wife. See De Francisco v. De Francisco, supra; Carmel v. Carmel, supra. See also Firestone v. Firestone, Fla.1972, 263 So. 2d 223. Accordingly, the order a…