NANCY H. HOOD, APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIE FRANKLIN HOOD, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 1989-01-05
No. 88-838
DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ., concur.
535 So. 2d 715 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1989) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Topics
Interest On Judgments Abuse Of Discretion

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Interest On Judgments cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
SHARP, Chief Judge.

SHARP, Chief Judge.

The final judgment of dissolution is affirmed except for the payment period for the award of attorney’s fees. The trial court required the husband to pay $14,000 for the wife’s attorney’s fees as follows: $200 per month with no interest for the first two years; 12% interest thereafter, or until the husband sold or otherwise transferred certain lakefront property.

The trial court abused its discretion in allowing the husband a seven year payment period, especially in light of the husband’s financial affidavit reflecting net assets of over $117,000 and a weekly income of over $1,100. Urbieta v. Urbieta, 469 So. 2d 930 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). Under these circumstances, we think that a payment period should not exceed two years, and that it should provide for interest at a reasonable rate from the date of dissolution. Accordingly, we reverse the payment period with directions to the trial court to determine a schedule for payment consistent with this opinion.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.

DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • R.M.A. v. J.A.S., 269 So. 3d 649 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)
    …"findings that would support allowing the Husband to pay the attorney's fee award in two installments over a one-year period"). The repayment period must be reasonable based upon the parties' respective financial conditions. See, e.g., Hood v. Hood, 535 So. 2d 715, 715 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) ("The trial court abused its discretion in allowing the husband a seven[-]year payment period, especially in light of the husband's financial affidavit reflecting net assets of over $117,000 and a weekly income of over $1,10…
  • Wright v. Wright, 965 So. 2d 1168 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)
    …because “use and possession of the home had been awarded to the wife until the youngest child attains the age of eighteen years,” payment of the former wife’s attorney’s fees could not be made from the funds from the sale of the home); Hood v. Hood, 535 So. 2d 715, 715 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (holding that “[t]he trial court abused its discretion in allowing the husband a seven[-]year payment period”); Urbieta v. Urbieta, 469 So. 2d 930, 931 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (holding that trial court abused its discretion in it…
  • J. A. L. v. R. M. A. (Fla. 2d DCA 2020)
    …estly unreasonable." See Wright v. Wright, 965 So. 2d 1168, 1170 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (holding that it was manifestly unreasonable to give the former husband up to thirteen years to pay the former wife's attorney's fee award); see also Hood v. Hood, 535 So. 2d 715, 715 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (reversing the order giving the former husband a seven-year payment period); Urbieta v. Urbieta, 469 So. 2d 930, 931 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (holding that the trial court's order establishing an eight-year payment schedule was "m…

Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw