Case Name: Douglas J. PYLE, Appellant, v. Rosalia PYLE, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1993-04-20
Citations: 617 So. 2d 1098
Docket Number: No. 92-2035
Parties: Douglas J. PYLE, Appellant, v. Rosalia PYLE, Appellee.
Judges: Before BASKIN, FERGUSON and COPE, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 617
Pages: 1098–1099

Head Matter:
Douglas J. PYLE, Appellant, v. Rosalia PYLE, Appellee.
No. 92-2035.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
April 20, 1993.
Ira M. Witlin, Miami, for appellant.
Becker & Poliakoff, Evelyn M. Merchant and Darin Engelhartt, Ft. Lauderdale, for appellee.
Before BASKIN, FERGUSON and COPE, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We agree with the appellant that the trial court, in fashioning an award of alimony, should not have relied on an adulterous act of the husband which was committed eighteen years prior to the filing of the dissolution petition, which had no economic consequences. The case is remanded for a determination based on the criteria enumerated in section 61.08, Florida Statutes (1991). See Noah v. Noah, 491 So.2d 1124 (Fla.1986) (evidence of a spouse's adultery is irrelevant in setting alimony award unless the misconduct caused a depletion of family resources). Heilman v. Heilman, 610 So.2d 60 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (same).
Reversed and remanded.