Case Name: Fred Thomas SHEEDER, Appellant, v. Constance Collage SHEEDER, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1990-10-30
Citations: 570 So. 2d 361
Docket Number: No. 89-1522
Parties: Fred Thomas SHEEDER, Appellant, v. Constance Collage SHEEDER, Appellee.
Judges: Before NESBITT, FERGUSON and COPE, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 570
Pages: 361–362

Head Matter:
Fred Thomas SHEEDER, Appellant, v. Constance Collage SHEEDER, Appellee.
No. 89-1522.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Oct. 30, 1990.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 19, 1990.
Weintraub, Weintraub, Seiden & Orshan and Eliot R. Weitzman, Miami, for appellant.
Andrew M. Leinoff, Coral Gables, Mark A. Gatica, Miami, for appellee.
Before NESBITT, FERGUSON and COPE, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order which denied the former husband's motion to modify the alimony provision of the final judgment of dissolution. We conclude that the evidence does not justify imputing to the former husband the same income or earning ability that he enjoyed prior to his involuntary termination from the position held at the University of Miami for twenty-one years. Compare Ward v. Ward, 502 So.2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (where former spouse voluntarily quit job for lower-paying position, trial court should have imputed amount of income former spouse was capable of earning). In considering the petition for downward modification, the trial court should have taken into account that the former wife was then earning a substantially greater income than at the time of the final judgment of dissolution. § 61.14(1), Fla.Stat. (1989).
The cause is remanded with instructions to enter an order which reduces the alimony award accordingly.