A Florida court has reversed a previous ruling regarding alimony and child support in the divorce case of Lorrine Nicole Golliner and David W. Golliner. The District Court of Appeal of Florida issued its decision on June 19, 2026, affecting the financial arrangements for both parties following their twelve-year marriage.
The court found merit in three of the Wife's arguments on appeal, stating that the trial court had abused its discretion in its previous rulings. This decision is significant as it directly impacts the financial support the Wife will receive and the obligations of the Husband moving forward.
Background
Lorrine Nicole Golliner filed for dissolution of marriage in March 2022 after twelve years of marriage to David W. Golliner. The couple has two minor children, born in February 2008 and March 2017. In May 2024, they entered into a marital settlement agreement that resolved many issues, leaving alimony, child support, and attorney's fees to be determined at trial.
The Wife requested durational alimony for seven years, the maximum allowed under Florida law for their marriage duration. She had not worked full-time in ten years and cited domestic violence as a significant factor affecting her ability to work. The Husband, a senior development engineer, reported substantial income, which highlighted the disparity between the couple's financial situations.
The trial included testimony about the Wife's mental health struggles following a domestic violence incident, where she alleged that the Husband attempted to choke her. This incident led to her seeking an injunction against him, which was granted but expired by the time of the trial.
The Ruling
The District Court of Appeal ruled that the trial court had abused its discretion in awarding bridge-the-gap alimony instead of the requested durational alimony. The court stated, "The trial court's award of alimony is subject to an abuse of discretion standard of review; and where the record does not contain substantial, competent evidence to support the trial court's findings regarding the amount of alimony awarded, the appellate court will reverse the award."
The appellate court found that the trial court's conclusions about the Wife's ability to work and her medical issues were not supported by competent evidence. It highlighted that the Wife's mental health conditions, including PTSD and depression, were significant factors that should have influenced the alimony decision.
Additionally, the court criticized the trial court's approach to calculating child support, stating that it relied on the Husband's 2023 financial affidavit, which did not accurately reflect his income history. The appellate court emphasized the need for a more thorough examination of the Husband's financial situation to determine a fair child support obligation.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for both parties. The Wife is now likely to receive durational alimony, which could provide her with financial support for a longer period than the previously awarded bridge-the-gap alimony. This change acknowledges the Wife's ongoing challenges in re-entering the workforce due to her mental health issues.
Furthermore, the court's decision to reevaluate child support obligations based on a more comprehensive understanding of the Husband's income history could lead to increased support for the children. This ruling may also set a precedent for how courts assess alimony and child support in cases involving mental health issues and significant income disparities.
What's Next
The trial court will need to hold a new hearing to determine the appropriate amount of durational alimony and child support based on the appellate court's instructions. Both parties will have the opportunity to present evidence regarding their financial situations and needs. The ruling can be appealed further, but details were not available in the court filing regarding any related cases pending.