Richards v. Richards

477 So. 2d 620, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2168
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 19, 1985
Docket84-1519
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 477 So. 2d 620 (Richards v. Richards) 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.

Bluebook
Richards v. Richards, 477 So. 2d 620, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2168 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

477 So.2d 620 (1985)

David T. RICHARDS, Appellant,
v.
Pauline I. RICHARDS, Appellee.

No. 84-1519.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

September 19, 1985.
Rehearings Denied October 29, 1985.

Johnie A. McLeod of McLeod, McLeod & McLeod, Apopka, for appellant.

Russell H. Cullen, Jr., Altamonte Springs, for appellee.

COBB, Chief Judge.

David Richards appeals the final judgment dissolving his marriage with Pauline Richards and awarding her $800.00 per month in permanent alimony, a 1982 automobile, payment of all medical expenses, and $3,000.00 in attorney's fees. Appellant raises a number of points on appeal contesting these awards; however, only one merits discussion.

The final judgment rendered by the trial court required the husband to pay, as permanent alimony, all of the wife's medical expenses not provided by Medicare or Medicaid. The husband argues that this requirement is in error, since an extended illness could wipe him out financially. This issue was discussed in the recent case from this court of Miller v. Miller, 466 So.2d 356 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In Miller, the husband was required to pay for all medical and dental costs incurred not covered by insurance. This court held:

... It is well established that a trial court, in its discretion, may order a former husband to pay a reasonable amount for medical insurance premiums for the wife as part of an alimony award. [Citation omitted.] The husband does not argue that he is unable to obtain medical insurance at a reasonable cost, rather he claims that the requirement that he pay all of the wife's medical and dental costs not covered by insurance and regardless of amount, is error since one extended illness could wipe him out financially. We agree and remand to the trial court to determine his maximum liability in this regard. Jordan v. Jordan, 389 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). See generally, Thompson v. Thompson, 325 So.2d 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).

Id. at 357.

In accordance with our decision in Miller, we remand to the trial court to determine the husband's maximum liability in regard to medical expenses. Otherwise, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Armstrong v. Armstrong
623 So. 2d 1216 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Bissell v. Bissell
622 So. 2d 532 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Watford v. Watford
605 So. 2d 1313 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Kremer v. Kremer
595 So. 2d 214 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Gay v. Gay
573 So. 2d 180 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Oh v. Oh
570 So. 2d 1030 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Marsh v. Marsh
553 So. 2d 366 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Brandenburg v. Brandenburg
550 So. 2d 565 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Perez v. Perez
539 So. 2d 1178 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Holtan v. Holtan
528 So. 2d 79 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
McCarthy v. McCarthy
523 So. 2d 1252 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Angle v. Angle
506 So. 2d 16 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Jones v. Jones
493 So. 2d 19 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
477 So. 2d 620, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richards-v-richards-fladistctapp-1985.