RAQUEL EUFEMIA HERNANDEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
DELFIN ANTONIO HERNANDEZ, 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.
A Florida appellate court reversed a final judgment in a dissolution of marriage case that awarded the wife only two years of rehabilitative alimony at $25.00 per week. The court held that under the circumstances—the wife's limited employment prospects, her role in the family, and the husband's substantial business income—permanent periodic alimony was warranted instead.
The court held that permanent periodic alimony in the amount set by the trial court was warranted rather than rehabilitative alimony limited to two years, based on the wife's circumstances, needs, and the husband's ability to pay.
[1] Rehabilitative alimony may be deemed permanent when the circumstances of the parties, including the wife's limited earning capacity and the husband's ability to pay, warr…
[2] A trial court's determination of rehabilitative alimony may be reversed and modified to permanent alimony based on the parties' financial circumstances and the wife's lim…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“the trial court based its rehabilitative award on the conclusion that the wife could expand her music teaching profession; the wife, however, has only a high school education. Her music skills are limited to those courses taken in high school in Cuba.”
Establishes why the court rejected the trial court's rationale for rehabilitative alimony as unrealistic given the wife's actual qualifications and experience.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe husband, age 43, filed for dissolution of marriage against the wife, age 44. Both are Cuban nationals; the wife has been in the United States sinc…
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 Rehabilitative Alimony cases and more on FLexlaw
[*467] WALDEN, Judge.
Plaintiff husband filed for dissolution of marriage. Defendant wife appeals from the final judgment and property settlement which, in part, awarded her the amount of $25.00 per week for two years as rehabilitative alimony. We reverse this portion of the final judgment and hold the alimony award should be permanent.
The husband is 43, the wife 44, with some training in music. Both parties to the dissolution are Cuban Nationals, the wife having been here since April of 1964. There are two children of the marriage, aged 19 and 13. The parties’ adjusted gross income in 1973 was $32,400. The income was derived from a business owned by the husband and found by the trial court to be an excellent one. The trial court found the business income had steadily increased over the period 1970 to 1973, and that the husband possessed considerable inventory and equipment. The husband was made responsible for mortgage payments and other related expenses during the wife’s occupancy of the home and she was granted exclusive possession of the home until the minor child reached 18, or until she remarried. In essence, all of the husband’s duties, other than the rehabilitative alimony, which was to cease earlier, cease when the minor child reaches the age of 18.
The trial court based its rehabilitative award on the conclusion that the wife could expand her music teaching profession; the wife, however, has only a high school education. Her music skills are limited to those courses taken in high school in Cuba. In light of the circumstances, the needs of the wife and the patent ability of the husband, we hold, upon authority of Patterson v. Patterson (4th D.C.A.Fla.1975); Reback v. Reback, 296 So. 2d 541 (3d D.C.A.Fla.1974) and Calligarich v. Calligarich, 256 So. 2d 60 (4th D.C.A.Fla.1971), that the husband be required to pay permanent periodic alimony to the wife in the amount set by the trial court as rehabilitative. We note there are no restrictions upon the parties’ right to apply for a modification if circumstances should so warrant.
Reversed and remanded.
DOWNEY, J., and JOHNSON, WILLIAM CLAYTON, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Yohem v. Yohem, 324 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)…ear old daughter. The appellate courts of this state have been confronted with situations analogous to this one in cases now too numerous for citation. E.g., Patterson v. Patterson, 315 So. 2d 104 (4th DCA Fla.1975); Hernan [*162] dez v. Hernandez, 312 So. 2d 466 (4th DCA Fla.1975); Goldstein v. Goldstein, 310 So. 2d 361 (3rd DCA Fla.1975); Lash v. Lash, 307 So. 2d 241 (2nd DCA Fla.1975); Schwartz v. Schwartz, 297 So. 2d 117 (3rd DCA Fla.1974); Reback v. Reback, 296 So. 2d 541 (3rd DCA Fla.1974); Wilson v. W…
-
Ciraco v. Domenick Ciraco, 363 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…, as opposed to permanent periodic alimony. Hawkesworth v. Hawkesworth, 345 So. 2d 359 (Fla.3d DCA 1977); McAllister v. McAllister, 345 So. 2d 352 (Fla.4th DCA 1977); Patterson v. Patterson, 315 So. 2d 104 (Fla.4th DCA 1975); Hernandez v. Hernandez, 312 So. 2d 466 (Fla.4th DCA 1975); Lash v. Lash, 307 So. 2d 241 (Fla.2d DCA 1975); Schwartz v. Schwartz, 297 So. 2d 117 (Fla.3d DCA 1974); Reback v. Reback, 296 So. 2d 541 (Fla.3d DCA 1974); Wilson v. Wilson, 279 So. 2d 893 (Fla.4th DCA 1973). We have carefully c…
Authorities Cited
- Reback v. Reback, 296 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Calligarich v. Calligarich, 256 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)