Case Name: Virginia S. RODGERS, Appellant, v. William J. RODGERS, Jr., Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1990-06-07
Citations: 561 So. 2d 1357
Docket Number: No. 89-2453
Parties: Virginia S. RODGERS, Appellant, v. William J. RODGERS, Jr., Appellee.
Judges: COWART and GRIFFIN, JJ. and ORFINGER, M., Associate Judge, concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 561
Pages: 1357–1357

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.