Weiner v. Weiner

403 So. 2d 408, 1981 Fla. LEXIS 2782
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJuly 23, 1981
DocketNo. 59776
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 403 So. 2d 408 (Weiner v. Weiner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Weiner v. Weiner, 403 So. 2d 408, 1981 Fla. LEXIS 2782 (Fla. 1981).

Opinion

McDONALD, Justice.

In this case we review Weiner v. Weiner, 386 So.2d 1251 (Fla.3d DCA 1980), because of conflict with Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980). Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const. We agree that no abuse of the trial court’s discretion has been shown and that the district court improperly substituted its judgment for that of the trial court regarding the award of periodic alimony.

On appeal from a final judgment in a dissolution proceeding, the district court increased the amount of periodic alimony awarded respondent by the trial court. The alimony award was but one of several issues comprising the final judgment. In proceedings spanning more than three years, the trial court had the unenviable task of adjusting the economic situations of the parties in dissolving their twenty-five-year marriage.

An appellate court may reverse an inadequate award of alimony when there has been a clear abuse of discretion by the trial judge. Firestone v. Firestone, 263 So.2d 223 (Fla.1972). We recently discussed judicial discretion and review thereof in Cana-karis and need not repeat that discussion here. Applying the Canakaris test to this case, we are unable to discern a basis for the district court’s reversal of the alimony award. Judge Nesbitt’s dissent is correct on this issue.

That part of the district court’s opinion regarding the alimony award is quashed, and this cause is remanded with instructions to reinstate the trial court’s alimony award.

It is so ordered.

SUNBERG, C. J., and ADKINS and OVERTON, JJ., concur. BOYD, ENGLAND and ALDERMAN, JJ., dissent.

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

Related

CARLA APESTEGUY v. MAXIMILIANO KEGLEVICH
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2021
Vidal v. Rivas
556 So. 2d 1150 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Edelman v. Edelman
453 So. 2d 891 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Severs v. Severs
426 So. 2d 992 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Weiner v. Weiner
405 So. 2d 312 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
403 So. 2d 408, 1981 Fla. LEXIS 2782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weiner-v-weiner-fla-1981.