Welch v. Welch

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Welch v. Welch

685 So. 2d 895, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 12326, 1996 WL 670102

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 20, 1996

DocketNo. 96-01120

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 685 So. 2d 895 (Welch v. Welch) 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

Welch v. Welch, 685 So. 2d 895, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 12326, 1996 WL 670102 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this dissolution of marriage action, the husband appeals the alimony and special equity awarded to the wife. We affirm the final judgment. However, one issue raised by the husband merits discussion. The husband argues that the court awarded an unspecified amount of rehabilitative alimony by ordering him to pay “all tuition charges incurred during [the wife’s] course of education in interior design for a period of two year's.” The rehabilitation plan presented by the wife included a request for tuition in an amount ranging between $12,000 and $17,000. Because the trial coúrt’s award is limited by the evidence presented, we conclude that the final judgment is limited to tuition payments in an amount not to exceed $17,000.

Affirmed.

PARKER, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., and MENENDEZ, MANUEL, Jr., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this dissolution of marriage action, the husband appeals the alimony and special equity awarded to the wife. We affirm the final judgment. However, one issue raised by the husband merits discussion. The husband argues that the court awarded an unspecified amount of rehabilitative alimony by ordering him to pay “all tuition charges incurred during [the wife’s] course of education in interior design for a period of two year's.” The rehabilitation plan presented by the wife included a request for tuition in an amount ranging between $12,000 and $17,000. Because the trial coúrt’s award is limited by the evidence presented, we conclude that the final judgment is limited to tuition payments in an amount not to exceed $17,000.

Affirmed.

PARKER, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., and MENENDEZ, MANUEL, Jr., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

685 So. 2d 895, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 12326, 1996 WL 670102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/welch-v-welch-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack