ARNOLD R. GELLMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
JANE ELLEN GELLMAN WOLF, 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.
Trial court's award of attorney's fees to former wife in visitation enforcement proceeding affirmed because no abuse of discretion was shown and trial court's findings of fact are presumed correct.
A trial court's discretionary award of attorney's fees in a dissolution proceeding will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.
[1] An award of attorney's fees in connection with dissolution of marriage proceedings is discretionary with the trial court and will not be disturbed absent an abuse of disc…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant sought to enforce visitation rights under a separation agreement made part of the final judgment of dissolution of marriage, and the trial c…
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 Dissolution Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks review of an order of the Circuit Court for Dade County awarding his former wife attorney’s fees in connection with his petition to enforce visitation rights as provided for in their separation agreement and made a part of the final judgment of dissolution of marriage.
It is appellant’s contention on appeal that the trial court erred in finding that the appellee was entitled to an award of attorney’s fees because of vexatious conduct on her part and her financial ability to pay for the services of her attorney.
The trial court found:
“1. That the Husband stipulated with the Wife that this court could award fees if any, on affidavits and her testimony by deposition.
2. That the Husband stipulated that he was financially able to pay a reasonable fee if this Court awarded one. 3. There Is no contemptuous conduct on the part of the Wife nor does this Court find her conduct vexatious. That if there was any vexatious conduct it would of been on both parties, [sic]”
The law is well settled that a trial court’s findings of fact arrive at this court with a presumption of correctness, Herzog v. Herzog, 346 So. 2d 56 (Fla.1977); Mufson v. Mufson, 245 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 252 So. 2d 798 (Fla.1971), and that an award of attorney’s fees in connection with dissolution proceedings is discretionary with the trial court and will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion, Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980).
Upon careful consideration of the record, briefs and argument of counsel and controlling principles of law, we conclude that no abuse of discretion has been shown.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sabates v. Sabates, 481 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…PER CURIAM. Finding no abuse of discretion in the order entered by the trial court, we affirm. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Gellman v. Wolf, 424 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Affirmed.…
-
Gieseke v. Haydee Gieseke, 508 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…equitable distribution of the parties’ assets or in the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees. We therefore affirm the final judgment. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1976); Gellman v. Wolf, 424 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Hartley v. Hartley, 399 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). We also affirm the contempt order. See Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla.1985); Cobb v. Cobb, 399 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Gersten v. Gersten, 281 So. 2d 607 (Fla…
Authorities Cited
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)
- Herzog v. Herzog, 346 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 1977)
- Mufson v. Mufson, 245 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Haskell Liberman v. Rhyne, 252 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 1971)
- S. Convalescent Home & R. P. Hewitt & Assocs. v. John Wilson & the Fla. Dep't of Commerce, 252 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 1971)