Warner v. Warner: When Alimony Awards Are Challenged on Appeal

Alimony is one of the most frequently fought-over issues in a Florida divorce. Since it depends on factors like financial need, earning ability, and what the court sees as fair, it’s not uncommon for one spouse to feel the judge got it wrong.

That was the case in Warner v. Warner, a 2025 decision from Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal. The dispute centered on whether the trial court was right to award durational alimony. On appeal, the court took a close look at the ruling and used the case to underline an important point: when alimony is contested, the award has to be backed by solid evidence as opposed to assumptions or impressions.

Background of the case

The Warner case came out of a divorce involving disagreements over money. Specifically, alimony and child support. In its final ruling, the trial court awarded durational alimony to the former wife. To support that decision, the judge made findings about her financial need and the husband’s ability to pay, including assigning him a higher income than he actually reported, a process known as imputing income.

The former husband disagreed with the outcome. He argued that the court had exaggerated what he was capable of earning and hadn’t backed up its findings with solid evidence. From his perspective, the amount and length of the alimony didn’t line up with what was actually shown at trial.

The appeal

On appeal, the Fifth District Court of Appeal looked at whether the trial court’s alimony decision followed Florida law and whether the evidence actually supported what the judge found.

Under Florida’s alimony statute, a court has to make clear findings on two things: that one spouse has a genuine financial need, and that the other has the ability to pay. Both are required.

The appellate court acknowledged that trial judges have a fair amount of discretion when it comes to alimony, but reminded that there are limits. That discretion has to be backed up by solid, reliable evidence. This is especially true when the court decides to impute income to one of the spouses.

In this case, the Fifth District focused on whether the trial court gave a valid reason for imputing income to the husband — and whether the record actually supported the idea that he could afford to pay the alimony that was ordered. When a court imputes income, it has to point to real evidence — like proof that someone is choosing not to work, or that they could realistically earn more based on their experience, skills, and job opportunities. Without that, the alimony award may not hold up.

Talk to a Tampa, FL, Divorce Lawyer Today

Westchase Law, P.A., represents the interests of Tampa residents during their divorce. Call our Tampa family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

caselaw.findlaw.com/court/fl-district-court-of-appeal/117796880.html