SAMUEL SCHWINDER AND STANLEY HAVES, APPELLANTS,
v.
MARION WILSON, INDIVIDUALLY, ET AL., APPELLEES
SAMUEL SCHWINDER AND STANLEY HAVES, APPELLANTS,
MARION WILSON, INDIVIDUALLY, ET AL., APPELLEES
503 So. 2d 932
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1987)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 11 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Appellee’s filing of a counterclaim fulfilled the contractual provision that entitled the seller to recover attorney’s fees if she were compelled to take “legal action to enforce” the contract. See Richmond v. Lumb, 339 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Appellant’s remaining point lacks merit. See Stabinski, Funt & De Oliveira, P.A. v. Alvarez, 490 So. 2d 159 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Pelton v. Pelton, 617 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…ecific request for retroactivity in the petition. We agree with the former Wife that no express request for retroactivity was required under these circumstances, so long as the increased need, as of the earlier date, was alleged. See Bloom v. Bloom, 503 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Keel v. Keel, 597 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Friedman v. Friedman, 307 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Apparently, the trial court rescinded its retroactive application of the modified child support award, based on the beli…
-
Butler v. Lavonne Brewster, 629 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…ion was filed. Ordinarily an order granting modification of child support should be made retroactive to the date the petition is filed, but it is within the trial judge’s discretion to determine whether to make the order retroactive. Bloom v. Bloom, 503 So. 2d 932, 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). It is an abuse of discretion, however, to fail to award support from the date of the petition for modification where the need for the support and the ability of the parent to pay existed at the time that the modification pe…
-
Thyrre v. Thyrre, 963 So. 2d 859 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…e intervening ..., the proof may demonstrate a substantially different condition at the hearing on the petition than that which existed on the date of the filing thereof. These are the things that involve a trial judge’s discretion. Bloom v. Bloom, 503 So. 2d 932, 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (citations omitted). Here, the former husband’s need for a reduction in his alimony obligation existed at the time of the filing of the petition for modification. In addition, the trial court did not state a reason for reje…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Stabinski, Funt & DE Oliveira, P.A. v. LAW Offs. OF Frank H. Alvarez, 490 So. 2d 159 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Richmond v. Colin F. Lumb and P. H. Jennefer Lumb, 339 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)