Woodward v. Woodward — How Florida’s Alimony Reform Changed The Game

In 2023, Florida completely rewrote how alimony works, and the biggest headline was the end of permanent alimony. As of July 1st of that year, judges cannot hand out permanent periodic alimony anymore. Whether a divorce was filed or had been dragging on for a while, this change hit across the board.

That legal shake-up set the stage for Woodward v. Woodward, one of the first appeals to really grapple with the new law. The case helped clear up an important question: what happens to alimony decisions in cases that were still unresolved when the law changed? In other words, do the new rules kick in midstream, or not?

Background of the case 

After 24 years of marriage, the couple filed for divorce. At the time, Florida law still allowed for permanent alimony, and the trial court — applying the law as it stood — awarded the former husband permanent support. The final judgment was issued in February of 2023.

Things changed quickly. Just a few months later, on July 1st, the legislature officially eliminated permanent alimony. That shift prompted the former wife to appeal the award. She argued that since their divorce case was still technically pending when the new law took effect, the revised statute should apply retroactively to the case.

On top of that, she took issue with how the trial court had calculated financial need and ability to pay. She also challenged how the judge treated her husband’s inherited assets and his extramarital affair in the overall alimony decision.

The appeal 

On January 22, 2025, the Florida Second District Court of Appeal issued its decision in Woodward. The court reversed the permanent alimony award, holding that because the dissolution petition was still pending on July 1, 2023, the amended statute applied — and permanent alimony was no longer authorized.

In reaching this decision, the court applied a long-standing principle: an action remains “pending” until all appellate rights are resolved, even if a final judgment has been entered at the trial level.

The court also noted other deficiencies in the alimony award. It found that the monthly $1,750 support exceeded the husband’s demonstrated need, and the trial court incorrectly calculated the wife’s ability to pay by using her gross income rather than her net income.

Thus, while the rest of the dissolution judgment was affirmed, the court remanded the case for a recalculation of appropriate alimony under the current statute.

Talk to an Orlando, FL, Divorce Lawyer Today 

Greater Orlando Family Law represents the interests of Orlando residents who are filing for divorce. Call our Orlando family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.