MAGDALENA SOFIA SOLERNOU, APPELLANT,
v.
RAFAEL JOSE SOLERNOU, 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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's post-dissolution rulings but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the former wife's application for suit money, holding that she was entitled to a hearing on her sworn application for indigency.
A former wife's sworn application for suit money in an appeal requires an evidentiary hearing to determine her need and the former husband's ability to pay, rather than a decision based solely on argument.
[1] A former spouse's sworn application for suit money in an appeal requires an evidentiary hearing to determine financial need and the other spouse's ability to pay, not mer…
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“Since the wife's application was sworn, she was entitled to an evidentiary determination of her need, and the husband's ability to pay.”
The court explained why the trial court erred in denying the indigency application without taking testimony.
The former wife appealed several post-dissolution rulings by the trial court, including a denial of her application for an order of indigency to cover…
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 Post-Dissolution Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The former wife appeals several post-dissolution rulings by the trial court.
The trial court correctly concluded that the former wife’s motion for recusal was legally insufficient and that the motion for rehearing was untimely. No reversible error has been shown with respect to the denial of the motion for contempt. The application for an order of indigency is moot with respect to this court’s filing fee. However, insofar as other taxable costs of this appeal are concerned, if any, we provisionally grant an award of costs to the wife, subject to the trial court’s conducting an evidentiary hearing to verify the ex-wife’s need and ex-husband’s ability to pay. See Sierra v. Sierra, 505 So. 2d 432, 433 (Fla.1987); Thornton v. Thornton, 433 So. 2d 682, 683-84 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 443 So. 2d 980 (Fla.1983); P. Padovano, Florida Appellate Practice § 16.5, at 269 (1988).*
Affirmed; appellate costs provisionally granted and remanded for further proceedings.
*
We construe the wife’s pro se application for an order of indigency as being an application for suit money for this appeal. The order of denial reflects only that the court heard argument, but not that testimony was taken. Since the wife’s application was sworn, she was entitled to an evidentiary determination of her need, and the husband’s ability to pay. See authorities cited supra.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Raborn L. Davis, Jr. v. Davis, 584 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…of fees subject to the trial court’s conducting an evidentiary hearing to verify the respective parties’ needs and ability to pay, as well as to assess a reasonable amount. See Sierra v. Sierra, 505 So. 2d 432, 433 (Fla.1987); Solernou v. Solernou, 556 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Thornton v. Thornton, 433 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 443 So. 2d 980 (Fla.1983); Shrine v. Shrine, 429 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Ludemann v. Ludemann, 317 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); P. Padavano, Florida A…
-
Randall v. Randall, 930 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…l or a portion of the reasonable appellate attorney’s fees. This court concludes that the appeal by [the former husband] lacked merit, and therefore the trial court should give great weight to the factors set forth in Rosen.”); Solernou v. Solernou, 556 So. 2d 1144, 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (“[W]e provisionally grant an award of costs to the wife, subject to the trial court’s conducting an evidentia-ry hearing to verify the ex-wife’s need and ex-husband’s ability to pay.”), cause dismissed, 564 So. 2d 488 (Fla.…
Authorities Cited
- Sierra v. Sierra, 505 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 1987)
- Avie Lee Thornton v. Lacy Thornton, Jr., 433 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)