John R. Secrist v. Elizabeth A. Secrist

Summary

The Fifth District Court of Appeal of Florida held that the 2023 amendments to Florida's alimony statute applied because the dissolution petition remained pending until entry of the final written judgment. The court reversed the six-year durational alimony award and remanded for reconsideration under the amended statute. It also reversed the equitable distribution of the husband's premarital Thrift Savings Plan contributions, while affirming the distribution of the marital home and cash accounts.

Holdings

1. A dissolution petition remains pending under section 61.08 until the trial court renders final judgment. Because the written final judgment was entered after July 1, 2023, the amended alimony statute applied even though the trial court had orally pronounced its findings and rulings before that date.
2. The amended alimony statute constitutionally applies to this dissolution petition because Wife's right to alimony did not vest until the final judgment dissolved the marriage on September 15, 2023. The trial court therefore erred by applying the prior statute and awarding six years of durational alimony; any durational award must comply with the amended statute's three-year maximum for this short-term marriage.
3. The trial court erred by classifying Husband's entire TSP as marital property and distributing it equally. Husband's $9,022.36 in premarital TSP contributions must be credited to him before the marital portion is distributed.
4. The trial court's distribution of the Florida home and cash accounts was affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the 2023 amendment to section 61.08, Florida Statutes, applied to the parties' dissolution petition because it remained pending on July 1, 2023, when the amendment took effect.
2. Whether retroactive application of the amended alimony statute was constitutionally permissible despite Wife's claimed vested right to alimony.
3. Whether the trial court improperly included Husband's premarital TSP contributions in the equitable distribution of marital assets.
4. Whether the trial court erred in its equitable distribution of the Florida home and cash accounts.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded