Summary
The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reviewed an amended final judgment of dissolution concerning the calculation of permanent periodic alimony. The court held that income from retirement accounts and interest-generating equalization payments should have been considered, identified a mathematical error in calculating the former wife's need, and reversed and remanded in part while affirming in all other respects.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion by not considering income from retirement accounts and interest on equalization payments when calculating the Former Wife's need for alimony.
- Whether the amended final judgment contains a mathematical error in the calculation of the Former Wife's need.
Holdings
- The trial court abused its discretion by not considering interest income from the 401K accounts and equalization payments in determining the Former Wife's income for alimony purposes.
- The amended final judgment contains a mathematical error of $10,020 in annual expenses unsupported by the record, requiring reversal and remand for recalculation.
Factual background
The case involves the dissolution of marriage between Harold and Catherine Stoltzfus. The Former Husband challenged the trial court's calculation of permanent periodic alimony, arguing the court failed to consider income available to the Former Wife from two 401K accounts and interest-generating equalization payments. Both parties identified a mathematical error in the amended final judgment's calculation of the Former Wife's need.
Procedural history
The Former Husband appealed the amended final judgment of dissolution, challenging the alimony calculation. The Former Wife cross-appealed on the same issue.
Remand instructions
Reversed and remanded for a redetermination and recalculation of the amount of the Former Wife's need and the resulting alimony award.