In Sherlock vs. Sherlock, the appellate court upheld the trial court’s imputation of income and subsequent denial of alimony. The imputation was based upon a reasonable rate of return from the assets available to the Husband, including his present home. The appellate court acknowledged that the trial court should not have imputed income to the home, but that imputation was only a small part of the overall imputation, so thus it was harmless error. A trial court may consider the value of a party’s estate in determining the party’s need for alimony. The ruling did not require the husband to invade the principal of his assets, but rather imputed a reasonable return to the husband’s net real estate and financial holdings. The imputation would not have invaded the principal.