JASON RICHARD BAUMANN
v.
SARA CARDONA AGUDELO
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's award of attorneys' fees and costs in a family law matter involving child-related issues, holding that parents cannot contractually waive a child's rights or a trial court's discretion to award such fees when determining the child's best interests.
The trial court has discretion to award attorneys' fees and costs in proceedings requiring determination of a child's best interests, regardless of any agreement between the parties waiving such fees, because parents cannot contract away the child's rights or the court's ability to act in the child's best interest.
[1] A trial court has discretion to award attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to section 61.16 in child's best interests proceedings, notwithstanding any agreement between par…
[2] Parents cannot contract away the rights of their child for support.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“[W]here the issue in litigation requires the trial court to determine what is in the best interests of the child, the trial court has the discretion to award attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to section 61.16, notwithstanding any agreement between the parties purporting to prospectively waive the right to seek an award of attorneys' fees and costs.”
Establishes the core holding that trial courts retain discretion to award attorneys' fees in child-related proceedings despite prior party agreements.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved a dispute where the parties had apparently agreed to waive or limit attorneys' fees and costs. However, the litigation required the …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Presumption Of Correctness Of Trial Court Decisions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Helinksi v. Helinski, 305 So. 3d 703, 708 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“[W]here the issue in litigation requires the trial court to determine what is in the best interests of the child, the trial court has the discretion to award attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to section 61.16, notwithstanding any agreement between the parties purporting to prospectively waive the right to seek an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.”); Berstein v. Berstein, 498 So. 2d 1270, 1272 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986) (“The law is clear that the parents may not contract away the rights of their child for support.” (quoting Armour v. Allen, 377 So. 2d 798, 799-800 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979))); Engelsen v. Landers, 699 So. 2d 1031, 1032 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (“The point of Bernstein is that if the parents cannot contract away a court's ability to act in the best interests of their child, then they cannot contract away one party's ability to obtain an advocate to see that the full story is developed in a child related proceeding.”); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“In appellate proceedings the decision of a trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error . . . Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory.”) (citations omitted).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Baumann v. Agudelo (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
- Bernstein v. Bernstein, 498 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)
- Engelsen v. Landers, 699 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Dena Spector v. Spector (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)