BILL W. HYATT, APPELLANT,
v.
IONE S. HYATT, 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 reversed an attorney's fee award in a dissolution case because the trial court failed to consider the former wife's need and the former husband's ability to pay, as required by the appellate court's prior remand order.
An award of attorney's fees in a dissolution case must be conditioned upon findings of the requesting spouse's need and the other spouse's ability to pay.
[1] In awarding attorney's fees in a dissolution case, the trial court must make findings regarding both the requesting spouse's financial need and the other spouse's ability…
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 intelligence“conditioned upon a finding by the trial court of need and a commensurate ability to pay after appropriate consideration of the financial resources of both parties”
The appellate court's prior order setting conditions for attorney's fee awards on remand.
In a dissolution of marriage case, the appellate court remanded for the trial court to determine attorney's fees for the former wife, conditioned on f…
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 Domestic Relations cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, Chief Judge.
In affirming a final judgment of dissolution following an appeal by the former husband,1 this court granted the former wife’s motion for attorney’s fees on appeal
“... conditioned upon a finding by the trial court of need and a commensurate ability to pay after appropriate consideration of the financial resources of both parties. Accordingly, this cause is hereby remanded to the Circuit Court for Volusia County for that consideration, and to assess the amount of the award, if any.”
Upon remand, the trial court awarded a fee to the former wife’s attorney after hearing testimony on the nature of the services rendered and the reasonable value of the fee. No evidence was presented at all as to the need of the former wife or the ability of the former husband to pay the fee. The former husband appeals and we reverse.
Not only does the order appealed from fail to comply with the order of this court, but it also fails to take into consideration the factors ordinarily considered in determining requests for the award of attorney fees in domestic relations cases, viz, the needs of the requesting spouse and the financial ability of the other spouse to respond. Patterson v. Patterson, 348 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). See also Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980).
The “Order [on] Wife’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees” dated April 15, 1982, is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith and with this court’s prior order of November 25, 1981.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur. . Hyatt v. Hyatt, 412 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)
- Patterson v. Patterson, 348 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)