Broemer v. Broemer
109 So. 3d 284
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- 27-year marriage dissolved; wife homemaker with no regular employment since 1993; husband breadwinner employed by BAE Systems.
- Trial court imputed $15,196 annual income to wife (later expressed as roughly $15,000) based on medical limitations and lack of job search; wife voluntarily unemployed despite alleged medical issues.
- Court awarded bridge-the-gap alimony of $2,000 monthly for 24 months and durational alimony of $700 monthly thereafter, citing modest lifestyle and both parties’ incomes.
- Marital assets divided evenly; home valued at $80,000 with a $2,000 lien; total proceeds to be shared; main money source post-dissolution was retirement plan of about $161,182.
- Attorney’s fees: husband ordered to pay $9,600 toward wife’s temporary fees; otherwise each party pays own fees and costs; appellate remand requested for alimony findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Imputation of income to wife | Wife cannot work due to medical conditions; no disability finding supports imputation. | Evidence shows she can work at reduced levels and should be imputed for alimony purposes. | Imputation affirmed; competent evidence supports earning capacity |
| Alimony type and amount; permanent presumption | Long-marriage presumption favors permanent alimony; lack of findings undermines award. | Bridge-the-gap and durational alimony appropriate given need and ability to pay; no permanent award justified. | Remand for proper findings on presumption and type/amount of alimony |
| Remand scope for alimony findings | Court failed to explain why permanent alimony was not awarded and did not recalculate income on remand. | Court's discretion governs alimony type; remand needed for correct income and rebuttable presumption findings. | Remand instructed to determine correct income and address initial presumption |
| Attorney’s fees and costs | Denial of additional fees premature if financial circumstances change on remand. | Equitable distribution allowed wife to bear costs; no abuse of discretion. | Affirmed denial; may revisit on remand if circumstances change |
Key Cases Cited
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1980) (alimony decisions rest on broad discretion with factual findings)
- Leonard v. Leonard, 971 So.2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (need for specific findings when imputing income)
- Schram v. Schram, 932 So.2d 245 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (employment potential and earnings basis for imputation)
- Griffin v. Griffin, 993 So.2d 1066 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (employment potential and vocational considerations in income imputation)
- Sellers v. Sellers, 68 So.3d 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (remand for findings regarding denial of permanent alimony)
- Ondrejack v. Ondrejack, 839 So.2d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (remand for adequate alimony factual findings upon remand)
- Demont v. Demont, 67 So.3d 1096 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (statutory factors for determining alimony amount)
- Margaretten v. Margaretten, 101 So.3d 395 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (permanent alimony standards under §61.08(8))
- Welch v. Welch, 22 So.3d 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (long-duration marriage presumption under §61.08(4))