MITCH FROWNFELTER
v.
JAMES BRIAN FROWNFELTER
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.
In this family law appeal, the Former Wife challenges a final judgment dissolving her marriage on six grounds related to homestead protections, alleged oral agreements, prejudgment interest, asset valuation, and attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed five issues without discussion and dismissed the sixth issue regarding attorney's fees as unripe because the judgment determined entitlement but not the amount.
The court affirmed the trial court's decisions on the first five issues without discussion. The court dismissed the sixth issue regarding attorney's fees as unripe for appellate review because the final judgment determined entitlement to attorney's fees but failed to determine the amount to be awarded.
[1] An appeal concerning entitlement to attorney's fees is unripe for appellate review when the amount of fees has not yet been determined by the trial court.
[2] An order that determines entitlement to attorney's fees, but not the amount, is premature and subject to dismissal without prejudice.
Previewing 2 of 2 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“The final judgment determined that Former Husband is entitled to attorney's fees but did not determine the amount of attorney's fees to be awarded.”
Establishes why the sixth issue is unripe—the judgment addresses entitlement but not amount
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMitch Frownfelter (Former Wife) appealed a final judgment dissolving her marriage to James Brian Frownfelter (Former Husband). The judgment addressed …
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 Prenuptial Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
CONNER, C.J.
Appellant, Mitch Frownfelter (“Former Wife”), appeals the final judgment dissolving her marriage to appellee, James Brian Frownfelter (“Former Husband”). Former Wife raises six issues on appeal, arguing that the trial court erred in: (1) determining that Former Husband did not improperly transfer homestead protections; (2) rejecting Former Wife’s contention that the parties had an oral agreement regarding Former Husband’s contributions to savings accounts as intended gifts to Former Wife’s children; (3) ordering Former Wife to pay prejudgment interest on certain funds she withheld from Former Husband; (4) determining the value of Former Wife’s vehicle for purposes of equitable distribution; (5) awarding Former Husband attorney’s fees for Former Wife’s failure to comply with a provision of the parties’ prenuptial agreement; and (6) finding Former Husband is entitled to attorney’s fees under the parties’ prenuptial agreement. We affirm, without discussion, the first five issues raised by Former Wife. We dismiss Former Wife’s sixth issue – regarding attorney’s fees – as unripe for appellate review.
The final judgment determined that Former Husband is entitled to attorney’s fees but did not determine the amount of attorney’s fees to be awarded. Because the judgment did not determine the amount of attorney’s fees to be awarded, Former Wife’s argument is unripe for appellate review. See Leiper v. Leiper, 331 So. 3d 233, 233 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (holding that an order that determines entitlement to attorney’s fees, but not the amount is “unripe for appellate review”). Therefore, we dismiss without prejudice the appeal of this issue as premature. See id.
Affirmed in part, dismissed in part.
DAMOORGIAN and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.