Case ID: so2d_561/html/1357-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Virginia S. RODGERS, Appellant, v. William J. RODGERS, Jr., Appellee.
    No. 89-2453.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    June 7, 1990.
    S. Sue Robbins of Matthies, Cross, deBo-isblanc, Haldin & Robbins, Ocala, for appellant.
    Young J. Simmons of Green and Simmons, Ocala, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

We affirm the decision below because we cannot characterize as clearly erroneous the determination of the trial judge that the monthly payment provisions of the property settlement agreement were not intended to be alimony. If a party to a dissolution agreement wishes monthly support payments to be construed as alimony, and therefore modifiable in the future, it is prudent that such intent be expressed in the agreement.

COWART and GRIFFIN, JJ. and ORFINGER, M., Associate Judge, concur.