WILLIAM VEIGA, III, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
TERI LYNN VEIGA, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
Florida appellate court affirmed a dissolution of marriage judgment but reversed the trial court's refusal to award attorney's fees, holding that a husband's spousal support obligation during marriage includes liability for the wife's prejudgment attorney's fees despite a prenuptial agreement purporting to contract away such liability.
A husband's spousal support obligation during marriage includes liability for a wife's prejudgment attorney's fees and cannot be contracted away in a prenuptial agreement.
[1] A prenuptial agreement cannot contract away a spouse's liability for the other spouse's prejudgment attorney's fees incurred during marriage, which liability is determine…
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“a husband's spousal support obligation during coverture includes liability (as determined using the usual need/ability to pay test) for a wife's prejudgment attorney's fees and cannot be contracted away in a prenuptial agreement”
Court's statement of controlling Florida law regarding attorney's fees in dissolution cases
William Veiga III appealed a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. The trial court denied motions for rehearing with language suggesting it would…
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 Prenuptial Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, Judge.
This appeal is taken from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. Timely motions for rehearing were filed, resulting in an order of the trial court denying the motions for rehearing “without prejudice to the matters being considered following the conclusion of pending [unrelated] litigation involving Eagle Flight Center, Inc., for which the court retains jurisdiction”. The threshold issue is whether the court is presented with a final appealable judgment. We conclude that the judgment became final upon the court’s express denial of the motion for rehearing and that the above-quoted language is ineffective to indefinitely hold the judgment in abeyance. Having determined jurisdiction exists, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed in all respects except for the refusal to award attorney’s fees based on the prenuptial agreement. Florida law is clear that a husband’s spousal support obligation during coverture includes liability (as determined using the usual need/ability to pay test) for a wife’s prejudgment attorney’s fees and cannot be contracted away in a prenuptial agreement. See, e.g., Fechtel v. Fechtel, 556 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). This cause is remanded for consideration of the merits of the wife’s attorney’s fees claim.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part and REMANDED.
DAUKSCH, J., concurs.
COWART, J., dissents without opinion.