Sima v. Sima
Mary Elizabeth SIMA v. Celestine Raymond SIMA
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PER CURIAM.
Pursuant to the authority of Lee v. Lee, 309 So.2d 26 , Fla.App.2d 1975, a trial court has jurisdiction to hear evidence and decide whether a modification of rehabilitative alimony should be granted or, if the circumstances warrant, a complete revisitation of the alimony question.
Therefore, the trial court erred in holding that it was limited in its jurisdiction to only extending the rehabilitative alimony.
Accordingly, the order appealed is reversed and the case remanded for a hearing in accordance with this opinion.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.