Opinion
No. 3D19-2284
12-09-2020
Sergio R. FERNANDEZ, Appellant, v. Miriam FERNANDEZ, Appellee.
Martinez-Scanziani & Associates Law, P.A., and Denise Martinez-Scanziani; Puzo Hernandez Law, and Leslie Puzo, for appellant. Law Offices of Paul Morris, P.A. and Paul Morris ; Laline Concepcion-Veloso, P.A., and Laline Concepcion-Veloso, for appellee.
Martinez-Scanziani & Associates Law, P.A., and Denise Martinez-Scanziani; Puzo Hernandez Law, and Leslie Puzo, for appellant.
Law Offices of Paul Morris, P.A. and Paul Morris ; Laline Concepcion-Veloso, P.A., and Laline Concepcion-Veloso, for appellee.
Before EMAS, C.J., and LINDSEY and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980) (applying an abuse of discretion standard to the trial court's alimony determinations); Viscito v. Viscito, 214 So. 3d 736, 737-39 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (observing that an appellate court generally reviews alimony and equitable distribution determinations for an abuse of discretion, and concluding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion given the presence of competent substantial evidence to support the trial court's discretionary rulings). See also Broadfoot v. Broadfoot, 791 So. 2d 584, 585 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (noting: "As a general rule, we decline to consider claims which were not presented in the first instance in the trial court."); Mulligan v. State Farm Florida Ins. Co., 127 So. 3d 852 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (noting appellant's argument on appeal was waived by having failed to present or preserve the issue at the hearing below or in a motion for rehearing).