Bagley v. Bagley
This text of 948 So. 2d 841 (Bagley v. Bagley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Ricky N. BAGLEY, Appellant,
v.
Brenda K. BAGLEY, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Robert J. Slama and Amber J. Hines of Robert J. Slama, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellant.
Moses Meide, Jr., Michael J. Korn and Tonya H. Walker of Korn & Zehmer, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges an order denying a petition for modification of his alimony obligation. The appellant sought modification pursuant to section 61.14(1)(b), Florida Statutes, and he contends that because it was shown that the appellee was in a "supportive relationship" the court should not have considered the appellee's financial need in deciding whether to modify the alimony. However, while section 61.14(1)(b)2 catalogs a nonexclusive listing of other factors for the court's consideration, the financial circumstances remain pertinent and the court was entitled to consider the appellee's financial need. See Donoff v. Donoff, 940 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); § 61.08(2), Fla. Stat.
The appealed order is affirmed.
ALLEN and WOLF, JJ., and ERVIN, III, RICHARD W., Senior Judge, concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
948 So. 2d 841, 2007 WL 173918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bagley-v-bagley-fladistctapp-2007.