Mayo v. Mayo
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
Appellant raises three points, all of which have merit. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with direction to proceed in accordance herewith.
The trial court abused its discretion in the total award of alimony and child support. See Todesco v. Todesco, 583 So.2d 774 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Gentile v. Gentile, 565 So.2d 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Further, it erred in failing to set a date for termination of rehabilitative alimony. See Roth v. Roth, 615 So.2d 868 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Sumner v. Sumner, 480 So.2d 706 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Zilbert v. Zilbert, 287 So.2d 100 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). Finally,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. RoweSupreme Court of Florida · 1985
- Gentile v. GentileDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
- Prom v. PromDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
- Sumner v. SumnerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
- Zilbert v. ZilbertDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1973
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Draulans v. DraulansDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011