NOREEN M. GARNETT, ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID B. GARNETT, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's modification of child custody but vacated the attorney's fees award and remanded for compliance with the Rowe factors, while also correcting a scrivener's error in the judgment.
A trial court does not abuse its discretion in modifying child custody when supported by the record, but must comply with Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe factors when awarding attorney's fees.
[1] Attorney's fees in family law matters must be supported by an evidentiary hearing addressing the factors set forth in Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. …
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 intelligenceNoreen Garnett appealed a final judgment that modified custody of two of the parties' children and awarded attorney's fees to David Garnett.…
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 Florida Patient'S Compensation Fund V. Rowe Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
PETERSON, J.
Noreen M. Garnett appeals a final judgment modifying child custody and awarding attorney’s fees to David Garnett. After careful review we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its limited discretion when it changed custody of two of the parties’ children. See Miller v. Miller, 671 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Stricklin v. Stricklin, 383 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
We find only two matters that need correction upon our remand to the trial court. First, we believe that the reference to “Mr. Nixon” in paragraph 9 of the judgment is a scrivener’s error and should be corrected to refer to Mr. Garnett. Second, the record does not reflect compliance with the requirements of Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985) in awarding partial attorney’s fees to the former husband. Upon remand, the trial court shall conduct an evidentiary hearing to consider whether the Rowe factors support the fee award and if not, modify the award. Notwithstanding, we agree with the trial court that in view of the length of trial of this matter that the fee awarded seems reasonable and suggest that the appellant may. wish to reconsider whether an additional hearing is economically feasible.
The judgment is affirmed except that we vacate the amount of the award of attorney’s fees and remand for redetermination and to correct the scrivener’s error. AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED IN PART; REMANDED.
HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985)
- Stricklin v. Stricklin, 383 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Miller v. Miller, 671 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)