DONALD RAY OWENS, SR., APPELLANT,
v.
VIRGINIA NELL OWENS, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1986-07-02
No. BF-128
SHIVERS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
500 So. 2d 170 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1986) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Topics
Rehabilitative Alimony Lump Sum Alimony Child Support Findings Of Fact

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rehabilitative Alimony cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
BARFIELD, Judge.

BARFIELD, Judge.

In this appeal from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, the husband asserts that the trial court abused its discretion in its award of lump-sum alimony, rehabilitative alimony, and child support. Finding no abuse of discretion, we must affirm.

We point out, however, that this court’s task of evaluating the final judgment of dissolution has been unnecessarily complicated by a final judgment that is vague and ambiguous. The trial judge could have made findings of fact, supported by the record, which would have strengthened the conclusions and resulting awards which are the subject of this appeal. Because our thorough examination of the record does not reveal that any of the awards constitute an abuse of discretion by the trial judge, we must AFFIRM the final judgment.

SHIVERS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Owens v. Owens, 559 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
    …ted by a final judgment that is vague and ambiguous. The trial judge could have made findings of fact, supported by the record, which would have strengthened the conclusions and resulting awards which are the subject of this appeal.” Owens v. Owens, 500 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). . It should be noted that the judge who entered the appealed order was not the same judge who heard the dissolution case and entered the original award of rehabilitative alimony.…
  • Allen v. D.C. Allen, 505 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
    …including some basic findings of fact in his final judgment. This is a recurring problem which ultimately may be resolved only by requiring the trial judge to include findings of fact in the judgments. I reiterate what was said in Owens v. Owens, 500 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987): We point out, however, that this court’s task of evaluating the final judgment of dissolution has been unnecessarily complicated by a final judgment that is vague and ambiguous. The trial judge could have made findings of fact…
  • Adkins v. Clora Adkins, 509 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Vandergriff v. Vandergriff, 456 So. 2d 464 (Fla.1984); Dinkel v. Dinkel, 322 So. 2d 22 (Fla.1975); Owens v. Owens, 500 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Haass v. Haass, 468 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Odom v. Odom, 452 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Hughes v. Hughes, 421 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Williams v. Williams, 297 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974).…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw