Former Wife Appeals Decision Of Circuit Court Not To Award Permanent Alimony/Attorney Fees

In the case of Beauchamp v. Beauchamp, the former wife, who was unable to work due to depression and anxiety issues, appealed the circuit court’s decision not to award her permanent alimony and attorney fees based on need. The parties were married on November 11, 2011. The former wife suffered from anxiety and depression throughout the duration of the marriage. By the time of the dissolution, she was unemployed. Her husband moved out of the marital home and split three bank accounts with her leaving his former wife with $106,000 and himself with $104,000. The husband filed for divorce on December 29, 2020. The former wife was also given half the proceeds of a boat sale valued at $16,250. She bought her husband out on another boat giving her a total of $13,250 which she deposited into her account.

During the divorce, the former wife used funds from the initial distribution to pay for her living expenses. At the time of the final hearing, she testified that she had $78,000 in her account. During the final hearing, the former wife introduced a deposition transcript of a licensed mental health counselor who testified on her behalf that she was unable to work. The medical expert testified concerning the longstanding and chronic nature of her mental health issues.

After hearing the evidence, the trial court entered a final judgment. The court determined that the former wife needed alimony. They also ruled that the former husband was able to pay alimony. The court found that the former wife was unable to work and declined to impute income to her. However, the court declined to award permanent alimony to the wife, finding that there was “no clear and convincing evidence that the former wife’s mental health condition is permanent.

The court instead awarded durational alimony in the amount of $2,000 per month which was set to end in July 2024. At that point, the court concluded that she would be able to withdraw from her retirement savings without penalty.

In terms of attorney’s fees, the court determined that the parties would be similarly situated after the equitable distribution of the marital estate and the alimony payment. They, therefore, determined that the wife had no need for attorney fees to be paid by her husband.

The appeal 

Did the trial court abuse its discretion when failing to award permanent alimony to the wife? The appeals court did not believe they did. The appeals court reviewed the trial court’s decision-making process and determined that the court made findings associated with each factor in section 61.08(2). In this case, the court determined that the former wife received considerable assets during equitable distribution and the award of durational alimony was appropriate to her situation. The former wife’s appeal was denied.

Talk to a Tampa, FL Divorce Lawyer Today 

Faulkner Law Group, PLLC represents the interests of Tampa residents pursuing a divorce. Call our Tampa family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing key aspects of your divorce such as equitable distribution, alimony, child custody, and child support.

Source:

casetext.com/case/beauchamp-v-beauchamp-8?q=dissolution%20of%20marriage%202024&jxs=flsct,flapp&sort=relevance&p=1&type=case&tab=keyword