Holli Poe Dennis, Former Wife v. Michael Dennis, Former Husband

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
HOLLI POE DENNIS, FORMER NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
WIFE, FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
Appellant,
CASE NO. 1D16-3929
v.
MICHAEL DENNIS, FORMER
HUSBAND,
Appellee.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed August 7, 2017.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County.
David Rimmer, Judge.
Ross A. Keene of Ross Keene Law, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellant.
Stephen A. Pitre of Clark Partington, Pensacola; and Trevor A. Thompson of Clark
Partington, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Former Wife, Holli Poe Dennis, appeals a final order terminating her
entitlement to alimony, arguing that the trial court failed to support its decision with
adequate factual findings. We affirm without discussion the termination of the
alimony obligation.
Former Husband, Michael Dennis, cross-appeals the final order, arguing that
the trial court should have retroactively applied the termination of his obligation to
pay alimony. A trial court has the discretion to modify alimony effective from the
date the petition for modification was filed or any date subsequent to the filing of
the petition. Acosta v. Renta, 84 So. 3d 1223, 1226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012).
“Retroactivity is the rule rather than the exception which guides the trial court’s
application of discretion when modification of alimony or child support is
granted.” DeSantis v. Smith, 634 So. 2d 796, 797 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
“Accordingly, there is a presumption of retroactivity which applies unless there is a
basis for determining that the award should not be retroactive.” Thyrre v. Thyrre,
963 So. 2d 859, 862 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).
Here, Former Wife’s need for alimony ceased when she began receiving
payments from Former Husband’s military pension. The trial court presented no
reason for denying the request for retroactive application, and the record does not
provide a basis to support the court’s denial of the request. Thus, the trial court
abused its discretion by failing to make the termination of alimony retroactive to the
date Former Wife began receiving a portion of Former Husband’s military benefits.
We affirm the trial court’s termination of alimony, but we reverse for the trial
court to order the reduction retroactive to the date Former Wife began receiving
payments from Former Husband’s pension.
2
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.
WOLF, ROWE, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
3