Legal Opinion · Dissent
Ruse v. Ruse
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided October 28, 1977No. EE-343Published
1DissentMills, Judge
I dissent.
I would reverse because Ms. Ruse failed to prove her need for alimony and failed to prove the ability of Mr. Ruse to pay her alimony.
Ms. Ruse’s testimony that she did not need alimony was unrebutted. At the time of the final hearing, Ms. Ruse was earning $12,000.00 a year and Mr. Ruse was earning less than $5,000.00 a year.
I would reverse on authority of Hackney v. Hackney, 324 So.2d 179 (Fla.4th DCA 1975).
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hackney v. HackneyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975