SWEETWATER UTILITY CORP., PETITIONER,

v.

SAVE OUR BAY, INC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Colucci v. Colucci, 392 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
  …So. 2d 160 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); King v. King, 316 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Blass v. Blass, 316 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Lash v. Lash, 307 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); Reback v. Reback, 296 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 312 So. 2d 737 (Fla.1975); see, Kvittem v. Kvittem, 365 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978) (no indication that existing earnings of wife would increase so as to justify termination of alimony after rehabilitation period or denial of permanent alimony); see also, Garri…
• Pirino v. Pirino, 549 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
  …. 2d 32 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), rev. denied, 494 So. 2d 1151 (Fla.1986), Mendonsa v. Mendonsa, 479 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), Murphy v. Murphy, 475 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) and Reback v. Reback, 296 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974) cert. denied, 312 So. 2d 737 (Fla.1975). Additionally, both parties’ earning abilities are among the factors which should be considered in determining the amount of alimony to be awarded. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980). The standard of living of the parties…
• Budagail S. Kirchman v. Kirchman, 389 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
  …alimony because there is no specific finding by the trial court regarding the need for rehabilitation or a plan to do so and thus is not tied to any specific rehabilitative purpose. Reback v. Reback, 296 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 312 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 1975). See Melvin v. Melvin, 265 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972) (alimony must be either rehabilitative or permanent). This award is rather like lump sum alimony paid periodically, but again, we find nothing in the record from the many declarati…