Case ID: so2d_802/html/0423-02.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

Marilyn REINBERG, Appellant, v. Marvin E. REINBERG, M.D., Appellee.
    No. 3D01-2512.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Dec. 5, 2001.
    Metsch & Metsch, P.A. and Lawrence R. Metsch, Miami, for appellant.
    Elkins & Freedman and Richard L. Freedman (Ft.Lauderdale), for appellee.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GREEN and SHEVIN, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The former wife appeals a non-final order denying her motion for her former husband to post a bond to secure his obligation to make future alimony payments. Although the former wife established a need for the security, there was competent substantial evidence presented that the former husband did not have the present ability to provide the same. See Dziuba v. Dziuba, 784 So.2d 1192 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Accordingly, on the record before us, we cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the former wife’s motion.

Affirmed.