
    Madge W. VAUGHN v. Charles G. VAUGHN.
    2900494, 2900494X.
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    Jan. 21, 1994.
    Ernest L. Potter, Huntsville, for appellant.
    David A. Kimberley of Floyd, Keener, Cu-simano & Roberts, P.C., Gadsden, for appel-lee.
    John L. Capell III and Ellen M. Hastings of Capell, Howard, Knabe & Cobbs, P.A., Montgomery, for amici curiae National Expose (Ex-Partners of Service Men [Women] for Equality), Alabama Ex-pose, Alabama Women’s Com’n, Alabama Women’s Political Caucus, Madison County Women’s Political Caucus and Churehwomen United — Huntsville.
   AFTER REMAND PROM THE SUPREME COURT

ROBERTSON, Presiding Judge.

The prior judgment of this court has been reversed by the Supreme Court of Alabama, and the ease remanded for further proceedings. Ex parte Vaughn, 634 So.2d 533 (Ala.1993). Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s instructions, that portion of the judgment of the trial court holding that the husband’s military retirement benefits cannot be included in an award of alimony in gross or in a division of property is reversed, and this case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion.

In accordance with our original opinion, the judgment is affirmed as to the remaining issues.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

YATES, J., concurs.

THIGPEN, J., recuses himself.  