JULIANNE J. DROUBIE, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT J. DROUBIE, APPELLEE
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 appellate court affirmed the increase in child support but reversed the denial of attorney's fees to the wife, finding the trial court abused its discretion.
The trial court modified a final judgment of divorce, increasing child support payments and ordering each party to bear their own attorney's fees. 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 Financial Resources Of Parties cases and more on FLexlaw
BOARDMAN, Judge.
We affirm the portion of the trial court’s order of modification of the final judgment of divorce increasing the child support payments in this case. The trial court has broad discretion in determining the amount of child support, Kahn v. Kahn, 78 So. 2d 367 (Fla.1955), and we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion here. However, we do feel the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to award the wife attorney’s fees.
The trial court is to consider the financial resources of both parties in determining an award of attorney’s fees. § 61.-16, Fla.Stat. (1977); Gray v. Gray, 362 So. 2d 294 (Fla.2d DCA 1978). Here the disparity in the parties’ relative financial positions justifies an award of attorney’s fees to the wife.
Accordingly, the portion of the trial court’s order holding each party responsible for his or her own attorney’s fees and costs is REVERSED and the cause REMANDED with directions to award the wife attorney’s fees'. The order is otherwise affirmed.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and ORR, GEORGE, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bette Johns v. Johns, 423 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)…circumstances of this case reflect an abuse of the trial court’s discretion in not awarding her attorney fees and costs. Sloman v. Sloman, 418 So. 2d 1249 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Mahoney v. Mahoney, 380 So. 2d 497 (Fla.2d DCA 1980); Droubie v. Droubie, 379 So. 2d 1331 (Fla.2d DCA 1980) and Canakeris v. Canakeris, supra. We remand with respectful instructions to award the wife reasonable attorney fees and costs, and to structure payment of same taking into account the income and abilities of the husband. Affirme…
-
Culp v. Culp, 413 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)…s only asset. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197, 1201 (Fla.1980). As to the award of child support, we see no error and AFFIRM. Child support is a discretionary matter and should not be disturbed unless abuse is shown. Droubie v. Droubie, 379 So. 2d 1331 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). REVERSED in part, and AFFIRMED in part. ORFINGER and COBB, JJ., concur. . See, e.g., Martin v. Martin, 376 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)—the evidence did not justify award of lump sum alimony when the parties had substantiall…
-
Carbonell v. Carbonell, 618 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…amount of child support awarded. The trial court has broad discretion in determining the amount of child support to be awarded. Leone v. Leone, 577 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Culp v. Culp, 413 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Droubie v. Droubie, 379 So. 2d 1331 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). We find that there is competent evidence in the record to support the award of child support and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in setting the amount of child support. Next, the husband contends that the trial…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Kahn v. Kahn, 78 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 1955)
- Gray v. Gray, 362 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)