DEWEASE L. WOODBURN, APPELLANT,
v.
RONALD L. WOODBURN, 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 court affirmed the trial court's non-final award of temporary support, finding no abuse of discretion based on the limited record.
The husband, netting $6,900 monthly from a new radiology practice, was ordered to pay $3,350 for child support and alimony, including the house paymen…
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 Temporary Support Order cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
This is an appeal of a non-final award of temporary support for appellant wife and four minor children taken pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130. With some degree of misgiving, we affirm this temporary order. In the comparatively brief hearing held before the trial court, during which each party testified, it was established that the husband was netting some $6,900 per month. Of that sum, the court required him to pay some $3,350 for child support and alimony, which amount included the house payment on the marital domicile wherein the wife resides. The evidence was that the husband is beginning a new practice in radiology, having transferred his practice from Orlando to St. Petersburg. The wife is unemployed. There was evidence that in the period of separation preceding the filing of the dissolution action, the husband had paid to the wife amounts ranging from $4,400 to $6,500 per month, and paid various other family bills.
Although we are disturbed by an award which, on its face, appears to allocate more money for the temporary support of one person than for five, we cannot say, based on the brief record now at our disposal, that the trial judge has abused his discretion as that term is defined in Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197, 1203 (Fla.1980).
The temporary order of the trial court is
AFFIRMED.
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr. and CO-WART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Velez v. Criterion Ins. Co., 461 So. 2d 1348 (Fla. 1984)…self-propelled vehicle and, therefore, a person injured while riding a moped is precluded from recovery under the personal injury protection coverage on his automobile. We find direct conflict with State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Link, 416 So. 2d 875 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). We have jurisdiction, article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution, and we quash the Velez decision and find that petitioner, Velez, may recover under his personal injury protection coverage. This cause involves the interpr…
-
Progressive Am. Ins. Co. v. Glenn, 428 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…PIP) and for Uninsured Motorist coverage.1 [*368] The trial court found coverage under both the PIP and Uninsured Motorist provisions. We affirm the ruling as to the PIP coverage on the authority of State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company v. Link, 416 So. 2d 875 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). The trial court’s ruling on the Uninsured Motorist’s Coverage is also affirmed. The appellant herein argues that the policy sued upon specifically excludes coverage for bodily injury sustained by the insured “while occupying a…
-
Cleosta Lane and Jerlene Lane v. Allstate Ins. Co., 472 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)…ecognized that “it has clearly been determined that a moped is not a self-propelled vehicle — it is a bicycle,” relying upon Velez v. Criterion Insurance Company, 461 So. 2d 1348 (Fla.1984) and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Link, 416 So. 2d 875 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). We also found in Prinzo that the definitions provided under the No-Fault Act (section 627.732(1)), the Traffic Control Law (section 316.003(2) and (21)), the Motor Vehicle Licenses Law (section 320.21(1)) and the Financial Resp…1 / 2
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
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)