Legal Opinion · Dissent

Weller v. Weller

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 1, 1998No. 97-1443Published

1DissentW. Sharp, Judge

I respectfully dissent. The fact findings of the trial court, in this case, were not specific enough in order to provide us with a meaningful review of an award of either permanent or rehabilitative alimony. See § 61.08(1), Fla. Stat. In such cases we most often remand to the trial court in order to afford it the opportunity to make adequate fact findings. See, e.g, Miller v. Miller, 625 So.2d 1320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Turner v. Turner, 529 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). I think we should follow that procedure in this case. This does not appear to me to be an open-and-shut ease for a no…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Turner v. TurnerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
  2. Siegel v. SiegelDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
  3. Contogeorgos v. ContogeorgosDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API