CATHERINE M. SMITH, APPELLANT,
v.
EDWARD G. SMITH, APPELLEE
CATHERINE M. SMITH, APPELLANT,
EDWARD G. SMITH, APPELLEE
374 So. 2d 18
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1979)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 11 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We have carefully considered the appellant’s four points on appeal challenging the final judgment of dissolution of marriage entered below and conclude that no abuse of discretion has occurred. While we may have awarded the appellant/wife a greater amount of alimony and child support had we been the trial judge, was are not at liberty to substitute our judgment for that of the court below. See Herzog v. Herzog, 346 So. 2d 56 (Fla.1977); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1976).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kissinger v. Mason, 436 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…did not abuse its discretion in awarding fees to wife’s attorney in view of the disparate financial positions of the parties and the purpose underlying the statute. See, e.g., Desilets v. Desilets, 377 So. 2d 761 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Fagan v. Lewis, 374 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). We note also that an award of attorney’s fees depends not upon who prevails but rather upon the relative financial resources of the parties. Hudgens v. Hudgens, 411 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Pursuant to the wife’s petition…
-
Bockoven v. Bockoven, 444 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)…n of the record reveals a detailed property settlement agreement which, among other things, provides for periodic payments of money by the husband to the wife. Appellant contends that periodic payments are not necessarily alimony. In Fagan v. Lewis, 374 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), the former husband appealed from a final judgment denying his petition for modification of a property settlement agreement entered into with his former wife in connection with a divorce judgment. The agreement required the husban…
-
Berry v. Lenore H. Berry, 550 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…-half of the pension itself. It merely allows for a variation in the amount of the monthly payment as the pension payments may change from time to time. The wife’s reliance on Vance v. Vance, 143 Fla. 513, 197 So. 128 (1940), and on Fagan v. Lewis, 374 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), as support for her contention that the instant agreement is a non-modifiable one is misplaced. In Vance, unlike the agreement here, the periodic payments were not for an indefinite period'of time, but for six years; and the agree…1 / 4
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 1976)
- Herzog v. Herzog, 346 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 1977)