FRANK L. NASH, APPELLANT,
v.
PATRICIA C. NASH, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the trial court’s award of temporary attorney’s fees finding that such an award was reasonable and not an abuse of discretion. § 61.16, Fla. Stat. (1995); Mueller v. Mueller, 307 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). However, we reverse the entry of the income deduction order solely for the payment of attorney’s fees on the basis that such an order is not sanctioned by section 61.1301, Florida Statutes (1995). Humana Health Plans v. Lawton, 675 So. 2d 1382, 1384 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)(“A statute which is in derogation of common law must be strictly construed, and the presumption is that no change in common law is intended unless the statute explicitly so states.”).
Affirmed, in part; reversed, in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Colligan v. Colligan, 759 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…e was that the trial court erred when it entered an income deduction order to secure the payment of a property distribution award. We grant rehearing and agree that such an order was improper, thus reversing on this point as well. In Nash v. Nash, 688 So. 2d 428, 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), reversing the entry of the income deduction order solely for the payment of attorney’s fees, we held that section 61.1301, Florida Statutes (1995), was in derogation of the common law and must be strictly construed. The Firs…
-
Silversmith v. Silversmith, 797 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…settled that an income deduction order may not be entered for purposes of effectuating the trial court’s plan for equitable distribution. See § 61.1301, Fla. Stat.(2000); see also Colligan v. Colligan, 759 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 3DCA 2000); Nash v. Nash, 688 So. 2d 428, 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Board of Pension Trustees of the City General Employees Pension Plan v. Vizcaino, 635 So. 2d 1012, 1015 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (“[Sjection 61.1301 is expressly limited in its application to collection of either alimony and chil…
-
Rose v. Rona Rose, 883 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…her burden of proving the reasonableness of the fees and the necessity of the fees sought. See Safford v. Safford, 656 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Accordingly, we affirm the order below in all respects. See 61.16, Fla. Stat. (2003); Nash v. Nash, 688 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Piluso v. Piluso, 622 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). Affirmed. . Evidence was also presented that the husband had a pattern of borrowing from credit cards, credit lines and banks to pay his bills. The husband used his credit c…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Humana Health Plans v. Lawton, 675 So. 2d 1382 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Igna S. Mueller v. Mueller, 307 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Price v. Firemen's Fund Am. Ins. Cos., 307 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)