SANDRA EPPERSON RICH
v.
JOHN D. RICH, ET AL
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 appellate court reversed a trial court's order awarding attorney's fees to the former husband and denying fees to the former wife. The reversal was based on a prior related appeal that required a new trial on key issues, necessitating reconsideration of the fee award.
The appellate court held that the trial court's fee award to the former husband must be reversed and reconsidered because it was based on findings that were deemed erroneous in a prior appeal. The denial of the former wife's motion for fees was also reversed, with directions for the trial court to consider the parties' financial positions and conduct.
[1] An award of attorney's fees must be reversed and remanded for reconsideration when the trial court's findings supporting the fee award are determined to be erroneous on a…
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“Given our disposition of the parties' related appeal from the final judgment of dissolution,1 we reverse.”
Establishes the basis for reversing the trial court's order.
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 awarded the former husband $126,220.61 in attorney's fees and costs, citing the former wife's inequitable conduct related to defenses …
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 Enforcement Of Antenuptial Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
KELLY, Judge.
Sandra Epperson Rich (the Former Wife) appeals the trial court's nonfinal order awarding John D. Rich (the Former Husband) $126,220.61 in attorney's fees and costs and denying her amended motion for attorney's fees and costs in this dissolution of marriage proceeding.
The trial court based its ruling on "the Former Wife's inequitable conduct regarding her meritless defenses to the establishment and enforcement of the parties' Antenuptial Agreement" and the Former Wife's "inequitable conduct regarding documents she allegedly procured from a dumpster on the private property of the Third-Party Defendants and their accountant." Given our disposition of the parties' related appeal from the final judgment of dissolution,1 we reverse. In Rich v. Rich, 337 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022), this court concluded that the trial court's findings regarding the interpretation of the antenuptial agreement and the admissibility of the "dumpster documents" were erroneous and that a new trial was required. Id. at 147–49.
Thus, because many of the findings on which the trial court based its attorney's fee award to the Former Husband will be 1 Rich v. Rich, 337 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022).
revisited on retrial, we reverse the fee award to the Former Husband and remand for reconsideration. We also reverse the denial of the Former Wife's amended motion for attorney's fees under section 61.16, Florida Statutes (2018), and Rosen v. Rosen, 696 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1997).
Upon remand, the court shall consider the relative financial positions and conduct of the parties during the proceedings, including the Former Husband's delay tactics, litigiousness, and failure to comply with many orders of the court. See Kelly v. Kelly, 925 So. 2d 364, 370 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (holding that the former wife was entitled to costs and attorney's fees caused by the bad faith of the former husband, including his obstructive tactics and his delay in paying sums due the former wife throughout the proceedings).
Reversed and remanded with directions. MORRIS, C.J., and SMITH, J., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Rosen v. Rosen, 696 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1997)
- Kelly v. Kelly, 925 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Rich v. Rich, 337 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024)