Recently, in a number of divorce cases the higher earning spouse has lost their job due to the current state of our economy which has created issues regarding alimony.
In Schmidt v. Syanovitz, 33 FLW D2799 (Fla. 2nd DCA December 10, 2008), the trial court found that the wife was entitled to permanent alimony, but the husband did not have the ability to pay permanent alimony.
The court awarded two years of rehabilitative alimony and reserved jurisdiction for two years to review permanent alimony later. One wonders why the trial court or the appellate court did not identify the husband’s ability to pay rehabilitative alimony as a source for permanent alimony.
The appellate court found that when one spouse is entitled to permanent alimony, but the other spouse lacks the ability to contribute to the other’s needs, a trial court should award nominal permanent alimony.
If we can assist with a family law matter call Hardestsy, Tyde, Green and Ashton.