Robert M. Warner v. Carolyn M. Warner

Summary

The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed a final judgment dissolving the marriage of Robert and Carolyn Warner. The court held that the trial court lacked competent, substantial evidence to impute income to Former Husband, improperly calculated Former Wife’s alimony need, failed to credit marital-bill payments against retroactive child support, and improperly included dissipated retirement assets in equitable distribution. The case was remanded for recalculation of alimony, child support, retroactive child support, equitable distribution, and the equalizing payment.

Holdings

1. The trial court erred in imputing $220,499.24 in income to Former Husband because the record did not contain competent, substantial evidence establishing the income he could earn if he returned to self-employment, and the amount was based solely on his prior average earnings.
2. The trial court erred in finding that Former Wife needed $7,433 per month because the figure included expenses for the parties' minor and adult children; the alimony award therefore had to be recalculated.
3. The trial court erred by awarding retroactive child support without crediting Former Husband for payments of marital bills made during the retroactive period that benefited the minor child.
4. The trial court erred in including the depleted Brookstone IRA and Lincoln Retirement Account in the equitable distribution scheme because the record contained no evidence that Former Husband intentionally dissipated or destroyed the funds.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court properly imputed income to Former Husband for alimony and child support when the evidence did not establish his current earning ability or that he was voluntarily underemployed.
2. Whether the trial court properly calculated Former Wife's need for alimony when her claimed expenses included food and other expenses attributable to the parties' children.
3. Whether the trial court properly awarded retroactive child support without crediting Former Husband for payments of marital bills that benefited the child during the retroactive period.
4. Whether the trial court properly included the depleted retirement-account funds in the equitable distribution scheme based on alleged misconduct.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded