Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

SHERILAN RAE MOLER, APPELLANT/CROSS APPELLEE, v. GEORGE PRESTON MOLER, APPELLEE/CROSS APPELLANT.

LETTS, Judge.

After the entry of a final order of dissolution, the husband successfully argued on rehearing that permanent periodic alimony, in the sum of $1,500 per month, should not have been awarded. As a consequence, the permanent award was set aside and in place thereof rehabilitative alimony for four years, in the same amount, was substituted. The wife now appeals that exchange and we reverse.

This was a long term marriage which produced one child and during which the wife, age 52, did not work. She does not have a college degree, her typing skills are minimal, she has failed the examination to become a real estate salesperson and she suffers from high blood pressure and arthritis. The husband is a college graduate, considerably younger, healthy, and successful, earning $83,000 per year.

This is a classic case in which to award permanent periodic alimony. See Hirst v. Hirst, 452 So.2d 1083 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), and Linn v. Linn, 464 So.2d 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). Accordingly, and without further discussion, we reverse the first amended final judgment with directions to reinstate the original one which granted permanent periodic alimony.

In all other respects, the cause is affirmed.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

WALDEN, J., concurs.

STONE, J., dissents without opinion.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MOLER v. MOLER
(Jul 10, 1987)