VICTORIA L. BARBARITE, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT BARBARITE, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed the award of costs but reversed the attorneys' fees award because the trial court failed to articulate its reasoning for reducing the requested fee from $17,500 to $7,500.
A trial court must determine a reasonable attorneys' fee using established criteria and then determine what portion the other spouse should pay, with clear findings on the record.
[1] When a trial court awards attorneys' fees in a family law matter, it must determine the amount of a reasonable fee using established criteria and then determine what port…
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 intelligenceVictoria Barbarite sought $17,500 in attorneys' fees from her former husband Robert in a post-divorce motion. The trial court awarded $7,500 without e…
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 Appellate Review Of Fee Awards cases and more on FLexlaw
HERSEY, Judge.
Victoria Barbarite appeals an order entered upon a motion to require the former husband to pay attorneys’ fees and costs. We affirm that aspect of the order pertaining to costs.
Appellant’s attorneys sought a fee of $17,500. In the order, which contained in-terlineations presumably inserted by the trial judge, it is provided:
ORDERED and ADJUDGED, that the Husband/Respondent, ROBERT BAR-BARITE, be and hereby is ordered to pay to the Wife’s attorneys, McCune, Hiaasen, Crum, Ferris & Gardner, P.A., the sum of $7,500.00, representing a reasonable portion of attorneys fees as determined by the evidence.
While the consequences of this order are clear, the basis for it is not. We cannot determine, either from the record or the face of the order, whether there was a determination of the amount of a reasonable attorneys’ fee and, if so, the amount of that fee. Where one spouse requests that the other spouse be compelled to pay attorneys’ fees and the facts justify granting such a request in whole or in part, it is incumbent upon that trial court to determine the amount of a reasonable attorneys’ fee using well-established criteria and thereafter, based upon the evidence and applicable law, to determine how much of that fee the other spouse should be required to pay. The within order is ambiguous and therefore deficient in that respect.
We reverse the award of attorneys’ fees and remand for further appropriate proceedings.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.
HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Angeline Bachman v. Bachman, 566 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…stablishing, with some degree of certainty, the amount of fees retained by appellant’s attorney after the payment of costs, we question how the court would be able to determine a reasonable attorney’s fee award. As we stated in Barbante v. Barbante, 464 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985): [I]t is incumbent upon that trial court to determine the amount of a reasonable attorneys’ fee using well-established criteria and thereafter, based upon the evidence and applicable law, to determine how much of that fee the ot…
-
Bernstein v. Zelman Louis Bernstein, 524 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)…to determine the amount of a reasonable attorney’s fee using well-established criteria and thereafter, based upon the evidence and applicable law, to determine how much of that fee the other spouse should be required to pay.” Barbarite v. Barbarite, 464 So. 2d 618, 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). Accordingly, we reverse and remand this matter to the trial court to consider fully the financial resources of both parties and to award attorney’s fees to the wife in an amount consistent with this opinion and the case au…
-
Dean v. Doyle Dean, 526 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)…custody to the husband was within the trial court’s discretion and the record supports the trial court’s determination. We reverse the award of attorney’s fees because there is no basis for the amount awarded in the record. Barbarite v. Barbarite, 464 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). We also hold that it was error for the trial court to fail to make an award of rehabilitative alimony to the wife. The record shows ability to pay on the part of the husband and need on the part of the wife, as well as the wife’…