PATRICIA ANNE PETERS, APPELLANT,
v.
ALBERT EZEKIEL PETERS, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Stipulation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals an order reducing rehabilitative alimony and although we might have reached a different result, nonetheless, there exists competent and substantial evidence to support the decision of the trial judge and, thus we must affirm.
However, there is also evidence in the record showing that the parties stipulated that in the event the trial judge awarded appellant an attorney’s fee, that fee would be in the amount of $200.00. The record further reveals that appellant had virtually no money to pay an attorney’s fee, but that appellee had approximately $2,000.00 in cash.
We believe the trial judge erred in not awarding appellant an attorney’s fee and in not requiring appellee to pay same. Therefore, although the order reducing rehabilitative alimony is affirmed, it is hereby modified awarding appellant an attorney’s fee of $200.00 and appellee is ordered to pay same within thirty days from the date this opinion becomes final.
Affirmed, but modified.
GRIMES, C. J., and SCHEB and RYDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Curt F. Fried v. Fried, 390 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…lity to compensate counsel. The wife, on the other hand, had assets in excess of one million dollars and a substantial income. Consequently, the trial court abused its discretion in denying the husband’s motion for attorney’s fees. Peters v. Peters, 366 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Sumner v. Tart, 362 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Accordingly, we reverse that part of the judgment denying the husband’s request for attorney’s fees. We remand with directions that the trial court enter an order awarding the…
-
Wright v. Wright, 559 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…ssue properly before this court is whether there was substantial and competent evidence to support the trial court’s modification judgment, and whether the trial court breached the very broad discretion given to it in such matters. Peters v. Peters, 366 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Benz v. Benz, 355 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Gaddy v. Gaddy, 415 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). I submit there was adequate and abundant evidence to support the trial court’s determination, and it did not abuse its discretio…
-
Hazen v. Hazen, 476 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…ourt reconsider this figure and order child support in an amount not less than $65 per week. Since the wife had no money for attorney’s fees, we also direct that the court order the husband to pay her attorney a reasonable fee. See Peters v. Peters, 366 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). We affirm the judgment in all other respects. GRIMES, A.C.J., and SCHEB and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.…