The correct standard for temporary alimony balances needs, as fixed by the parties’ standard of living and the ability to pay on the other. In Hoffman v. Hoffman, the Florida Court of Appeal recently stated: “Although the order under review is a temporary support order in which the circuit court has broad discretion, we conclude that the circuit court abused its discretion in requiring the Husband to virtually exhaust his monthly income to make the ordered payments, leaving him with insufficient funds to support himself.
The order’s requirement that the Husband spend in excess of 80% of his income in monthly support and temporary attorney’s fee payments reflects an abuse of discretion on its face…'[t]he correct standard by which temporary support and alimony are to be assessed balances needs, as fixed by the parties’ standard of living on the one hand, and ability to pay, on the other.’ Fonderson v. Lairap, 98 So. 3d 715, 717 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…The Husband argues that the circuit court abused its discretion in ordering him to make support and attorney fee payments which consume more than 80% of his net monthly income and in requiring him to pay all of the Wife’s temporary attorney’s fees. We agree and reverse the order in part and remand for further proceedings…Finally, as argued by the Husband, it appears that the circuit court may not have considered the effect of the court-ordered spousal support on the Wife’s ability to pay her temporary attorney’s fees, particularly in light of the retroactive support award totaling $22,730. See Crick, 78 So. 3d at 699 (‘A trial court must consider all assets and sources of income in an award for attorney’s fees.’). Accordingly, on remand the circuit court shall reconsider the Wife’s entitlement to temporary attorney’s fees.”
To speak with a Singer Island divorce attorney, contact Matthew Lane & Associates, P.A. at (561) 651-7273.