Case ID: so2d_738/html/0979-02.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

Judith Karen SOFFLER, Appellant, v. Robert Jay SOFFLER, Appellee.
    No. 97-4552.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    June 30, 1999.
    Rehearing Denied Sept. 1, 1999.
    Barry L. Zisser and Nancy N. Nowhs of Zisser, Robison, Brown, Nowlis & Wedner, P.A., Jacksonville, Attorneys for Appellant.
    Samuel S. Jacobson of Datz, Jacobson, Lembcke & Wright, Jacksonville, Attorney for Appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal of the trial court’s final judgment of dissolution. Former Wife raises three issues on appeal. As to the first issue, Former Husband concedes that the trial court erred in failing to include the value of Former Husband’s office equipment in the equitable distribution scheme. We agree with the concession, and affirm the remainder of the equitable distribution scheme. As to the second issue, the award of rehabilitative and permanent alimony, we find no error in the total amount of alimony awarded. However, we reverse and remand to the trial court with directions to reapportion the total amount awarded between permanent and rehabilitative alimony, based upon the statutory factors and the evidence. As to the last issue raised, we affirm without further comment.

Accordingly, we affirm in part, but reverse and remand for the correction of the equitable distribution scheme and for a realistic apportionment of permanent and rehabilitative alimony.

BOOTH, JOANOS and WEBSTER, JJ., CONCUR.