Court Opinion

ID: 9903193
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-27 15:31:42.385088+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:07.845838
License: Public Domain

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
                           FIFTH DISTRICT

                                        NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
                                        FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
                                        DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

ROGER MALOCH,

           Appellant,

v.                                          Case No. 5D21-2493
                                            LT Case No. 2007-DR-0920

LAURA DAVIS F/K/A LAURA MALOCH,

           Appellee.

________________________________/

Decision filed May 12, 2023

Appeal from the Circuit Court
for St. Johns County,
Joan Anthony, Judge.

William S. Graessle, of William S.
Graessle, P.A., Jacksonville, for
Appellant.

Rebecca Bowen Creed, of Creed &
Gowdy, P.A., Jacksonville, for
Appellee.

PER CURIAM.
     AFFIRMED.

LAMBERT, C.J., and EDWARDS, J., concur.
EISNAUGLE, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part, with opinion.
                                               Case No. 5D21-2493
                                               LT Case No. 2007-DR-0920

EISNAUGLE, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part.

      Former Husband argues, inter alia, that a miscalculation of alimony

appears on the face of the judgment. I agree, but I cannot discern if the

miscalculation is in the trial court’s assessment of Former Wife’s need or in

the alimony amount itself. Therefore, I would reverse for the trial court to

reconsider both calculations. See Poropat v. Poropat, 54 So. 3d 507, 508

(Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (“[W]e reverse and remand to the trial court to correct

the mathematical error which is reflected on the face of the order.” (citation

omitted)). I would otherwise affirm.

                                       2