DONNA KAY STEWART, APPELLANT,
v.
PERCY RANDALL STEWART, 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.
In this Florida family law appeal, the former wife challenges the trial court's award of only partial attorney's fees and costs in a dissolution of marriage proceeding. The appellate court reverses the partial award because the trial court failed to provide specific findings explaining the reduction, as required by Florida law.
The award of partial attorney's fees and costs is reversed and remanded because the trial court failed to make specific findings regarding the reduction as required by Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe and Florida Statutes § 61.16.
[1] An order awarding attorney's fees and costs in a dissolution of marriage proceeding must be reversed if it fails to set forth specific findings regarding the appropriaten…
[2] The trial court's determination of attorney's fees and costs in a dissolution of marriage proceeding is subject to reversal if the order is silent regarding the rationale…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“When an order awarding attorney's fees and costs fails to set forth specific findings regarding the appropriateness of the enhancement or reduction of an award pursuant to the requirements set forth in Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla.1985), the order will be reversed, notwithstanding the existence vel non of competent substantial evidence upon which the trial court could have based its determination.”
Establishes the absolute requirement for specific findings when reducing attorney's fees awards, regardless of evidentiary support
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court found that the wife reasonably incurred $1,170.54 in court costs and expenses, and her attorney reasonably expended 45.8 hours at $75 …
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 Florida Patient'S Compensation Fund V. Rowe Standard For Attorney'S Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
JOANOS, Judge.
The former wife challenges the portion of the amended final judgment which awarded to the wife only a fraction of the attorney’s fees and costs she incurred in the underlying dissolution of marriage proceeding. The sole issue on appeal is the propriety of the partial award.
At paragraph eight of the amended final judgment, the trial court found that the wife reasonably expended the sum of $1,170.54 as court costs and out-of-pocket expenses, and that her attorney reasonably expended 45.8 hours in the representation, at an hourly rate of $75.00. After making these express findings, the trial court directed the husband to pay $585.27 in costs, and $1,500 as partial attorney’s fees. The amended final judgment is silent with regard to the rationale involved in the determination to award partial attorney’s fees and costs.
Section 61.16, Florida Statutes, which governs attorney’s fees, suit money, and costs in dissolution of marriage proceedings, provides:
The court may from time to time, after considering the financial resources of both parties, order a party to pay a reasonable amount for attorney’s fees, suit money, and the cost to the other party of maintaining or defending any proceeding under this chapter, including enforcement and modification proceedings. The court may order that the amount be paid directly to the attorney, who may enforce the order in his name.
When an order awarding attorney’s fees and costs fails to set forth specific findings regarding the appropriateness of the enhancement or reduction of an award pursuant to the requirements set forth in Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985), the order will be reversed, notwithstanding the existence vel non of competent substantial evidence upon which the trial court could have based its determination. See Foster v. Foster, 528 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Manuel v. Manuel, 498 So. 2d 1869 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); McCann v. McCann, 528 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Lanham v. Lanham, 528 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Shields v. Shields, 502 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Boyle v. Boyle, 485 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).
Therefore, the portion of the amended final judgment which awards partial attorney’s fees and costs to the wife is reversed and remanded with directions to make specific findings in accordance with Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, and decisions from this court. In all other respects, the amended final judgment is affirmed.
WIGGINTON and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cole v. Roberts, 661 So. 2d 370 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)…d when it determined, as reasonable, her entitlement to fees of $13,559.30; then, without explanation, required the husband to pay 'only $7,593.21, thereby reducing the husband’s responsibility to only 56% of the total award. See Stewart v. Stewart, 534 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (factual findings must support the award of partial fees). Here, we find no error as to the wife’s entitlement or amount of her fees. Nevertheless, we remand to the trial court with instructions for it to set forth findings of fa…
-
Wilkins v. Wilkins, 546 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)…rial court virtually split the assets equally and made its determination that the wife should pay part of her fees in view of her present financial status. By way of supplemental authority, the wife furnished us with the case of Stewart v. Stewart, 534 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), in which the trial court awarded the wife only a fraction of the attorney’s fees and costs she incurred. She appealed and assigned the partial award as error. The trial court found that the wife reasonably expended the sum of $1…
-
Glasgow v. Wolfe, 873 So. 2d 483 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…9, 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). “This provision expressly requires the court to make findings regarding the parties’ re [*485] spective financial needs and abilities to pay.” Sumlar, 827 So. 2d at 1084. See Raehn, 557 So. 2d at 152; Stewart v. Stewart, 534 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Without holding a hearing, the trial court determined that neither party is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and costs, but the final judgment of paternity lacks any specific factual findings to support that ruling. In…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985)
- Boyle v. Boyle, 485 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- Shields v. Lissi Shields, 502 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Lanham v. Lanham, 528 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)
- F.L. v. State, 528 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)
- Mitchell v. State, 528 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- Foster v. Foster, 528 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)