Tuthill v. Tuthill

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tuthill v. Tuthill

954 So. 2d 754, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 6647, 2007 WL 1263517

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 2, 2007

DocketNo. 4D06-2515

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 954 So. 2d 754 (Tuthill v. Tuthill) 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

Tuthill v. Tuthill, 954 So. 2d 754, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 6647, 2007 WL 1263517 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

James M. Tuthill (former husband) appeals a final order of dissolution awarding alimony to Barbara Anne Tuthill (former wife). Based on the unique facts and circumstances of this case, we affirm the lump sum alimony award of $129,000, which is payable when multiple real properties are sold, but reverse the award of bridge-the-gap alimony to the former wife, because of the former wife’s superior net worth after equitable distribution and the present inability of the former husband to pay. We remand this cause to the trial court with directions to reserve jurisdiction to award alimony in the future should [755]*755the former husband establish an actual or imputed income. See Schwartz v. Schwartz, 450 So.2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (reversing permanent periodic alimony to wife whose income virtually equaled that of husband and whose earning capacity and net worth exceeded those of husband); see also Misiak v. Misiak, 898 So.2d 1159 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (affirming denial of substantial alimony by trial judge where former husband did not have current ability to pay and former wife’s needs were currently met through her share of the equitable distribution).

Affirmed in part, Reversed in part.

SHAHOOD, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

James M. Tuthill (former husband) appeals a final order of dissolution awarding alimony to Barbara Anne Tuthill (former wife). Based on the unique facts and circumstances of this case, we affirm the lump sum alimony award of $129,000, which is payable when multiple real properties are sold, but reverse the award of bridge-the-gap alimony to the former wife, because of the former wife’s superior net worth after equitable distribution and the present inability of the former husband to pay. We remand this cause to the trial court with directions to reserve jurisdiction to award alimony in the future should [755]*755the former husband establish an actual or imputed income. See Schwartz v. Schwartz, 450 So.2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (reversing permanent periodic alimony to wife whose income virtually equaled that of husband and whose earning capacity and net worth exceeded those of husband); see also Misiak v. Misiak, 898 So.2d 1159 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (affirming denial of substantial alimony by trial judge where former husband did not have current ability to pay and former wife’s needs were currently met through her share of the equitable distribution).

Affirmed in part, Reversed in part.

SHAHOOD, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

954 So. 2d 754, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 6647, 2007 WL 1263517, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tuthill-v-tuthill-fladistctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack