226 So. 2d 114 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 1969
Lead Opinion
This is an appeal from a final decree of divorce in which the minor children were awarded to the mother, appellant herein, with stated sums of money to be paid by the appellee-father, for support of each child.
No mention of alimony was made m the final decree and neither did the court express a finding of with whom the equities existed.
The appellant assigned as error, only the failure to allow alimony.
By order of the lower court no part of the evidence pertaining to the grounds and proofs on the divorce proper was transcribed and furnished as a part of the record. The only portion of the evidence transcribed and furnished this court in the record pertains to property and income of the parties. Therefore, we have no record of facts from which we may determine what other, if any, factors, were considered by the trial court in entering the final decree of divorce, without making any adjudication as to alimony or the equities of the respective parties.
Reversed and remanded, under authority of Friedman v. Friedman, supra.
Concurrence Opinion
(specially concurring).
I am in accord with the conclusion by the majority of remanding this cause for further proceedings. However, the opinion of the majority strongly infers that the trial judge must as a matter of law grant alimony to the wife. I do not agree with this inference.
Further, the trial court granted a liberal award for child support. It appears that the wife may well within the decree being reviewed find a slice from the children’s loaf of bread for herself. It is my view that all money matters, including the amount awarded for child support, should be reconsidered by the Chancellor in his review of the instant decree.