Schlapik v. Schlapik

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Schlapik v. Schlapik

329 So. 2d 379, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14056

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 30, 1976

DocketNo. 75-868

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 329 So. 2d 379 (Schlapik v. Schlapik) 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

Schlapik v. Schlapik, 329 So. 2d 379, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14056 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We are asked to review an order modifying a final judgment dissolving a marriage upon a record which does not include any of the testimony before the trial judge. It is apparent from the record and the findings of fact that the trial judge heard extensive testimony.

The distinguishing feature in this case is that the trial judge determined that the former wife was not entitled to any alimony after an expiration of four and one-half years from the original award. It is clear that there are circumstances under which alimony awarded may be terminated because of a change of circumstances. See 18 A.L.R.2d 10, 19.

Under the record presented to us, we are unable to determine that the trial judge abused his very broad discretion in this matter. See the rule in Vilas v. Vilas, 1943, 153 Fla. 102, 13 So.2d 807; and Coggan v. Coggan, Fla.App.1968, 214 So.2d 368.

AFFIRMED.

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