Court Opinion

ID: 9932069
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:32:12.538562+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:32.736008
License: Public Domain

I concur in the holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to award periodic alimony. However, I dissent from the holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to reserve the issue for future consideration, given the length of the marriage and the disparity in the employment and income of the parties.Pilgrim v. Pilgrim, 596 So.2d 942 (Ala.Civ.App. 1992); Silveyv. Silvey, 634 So.2d 138 (Ala.Civ.App. 1993).
Additionally, because the trial court's order does not indicate whether the court considered the husband's retirement benefits when it divided the parties' property, I would remand for the trial court to consider this issue and make a finding. See Byrd v. Byrd, 644 So.2d 31, 32 (Ala.Civ.App. 1994). *Page 31