Florida Statute § 61.14(1)(a) authorizes a court to modify alimony “when the circumstances or the financial ability of either party changes …” See King v. King, 82 So. 3d 1124, 1129 (Fla. 2d 2012). Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal recently addressed the issue of modification of alimony in Murphy v. Murphy, No. 3D11-1604 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 6, 2013). In Murphy, a trial court granted a former husband’s petition for a reduction, or “downward modification,” of alimony. After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the trial court concluded that the former wife was in a “supportive relationship” as defined under Fla. Stat. § 61.14(1)(b) and that a reduction in the wife’s alimony was appropriate. Id. at *1.
The trial court in Murphy reduced the former husband’s alimony obligation by $700 per month. The former wife argued on appeal that the trial court’s judgment should be reversed. The Third District disagreed, finding that there was substantial, competent evidence to support the trial court’s order. Id. at *2.
The Murphy decision is helpful as it walks through the factors a trial court must consider before in can modify alimony. Under Florida Statute § 61.14(1)(a), a party wishing to modify alimony must establish that (1) there was a change in circumstances; (2) the change in circumstances was not contemplated at the time of the final judgment for divorce; and (3) the change in circumstances is sufficient, involuntary, material and permanent in nature. Id. at *3, citing Pimm v. Pimm, 601 So. 2d 534, 536 (Fla. 1992).
In Murphy, the court had to consider whether a change in circumstances based on the wife’s “cohabitation” with another person warranted modification of alimony. Here, the court considers two factors: (1) whether the conhabitant provides support to the former spouse (i.e. the wife in this instance); and (2) whether the recipient spouse contributes to the support of the cohabitant. Opinion at *3, citing Maclaren v. Maclaren, 616 So. 2d 104, 106 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).
In 2005, the Florida Legislature enacted subsection (b) to section 61.14(1), which in effect codified the reduction or termination of alimony based on cohabitation. Murphy at *3-4, citing King v. King, 82 So. 3d 1124, 1131 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). After considering the statute and relevant case law, the court in Murphy found that former wife was in a cohabitating relationship with a person who did not have a separate residence. The former wife paid for the couple’s food while her boyfriend helped with maintenance of the couple’s home. Based on the record before it, the appellate court in Murphy affirmed the trial court order.