ROBERT ALAN MILLER, APPELLANT,
v.
SYBIL JEAN MILLER, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Ripeness For Review cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1057] PER CURIAM.
Robert Alan Miller (“the former husband”) appeals the final judgment dissolving his marriage to Sybil Jean Miller (“the former wife”). Finding no merit to the issues raised regarding the division of real property or the award of alimony, both lump sum and permanent periodic awards, we affirm without further discussion. We, however, decline to exercise our jurisdiction as to the former wife’s entitlement to attorney’s fees because the judgment does not set the amount of fees and thus, the issue is not ripe for our review. Carlson v. Carlson, 696 So. 2d 1332, 1333 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Ritchie v. Ritchie, 687 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Ritter v. Ritter, 690 So. 2d 1372, 1376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Accordingly, we dismiss that portion of the appeal directed to entitlement.
AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART.
DAVIS, BENTON and BROWNING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Livadas v. Panos E. Livadas, 827 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. We dismiss appellant’s challenge to the trial court’s decision that appellee is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees as not ripe for review. See Miller v. Miller, 801 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). We conclude that appellant’s remaining arguments are without merit and, accordingly, affirm as to them. AFFIRMED IN PART and DISMISSED IN PART. MINER, KAHN and WEBSTER, JJ„ concur.…
-
Norman v. Farrow, 832 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…ven below, we address only the first point raised, and we affirm the trial court’s reduction of the PIP set-off. The four points on appeal challenging appellee’s entitlement to attorney’s ' fees are not ripe for review. See, e.g:, Miller v. Miller, 801 So. 2d 1056, 1057 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Ulrich v. Eaton Vance Distribs., Inc., 764 So. 2d 731, 733 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Cf. Ritchie v. Ritchie, 687 So. 2d 1358, 1359 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (“In this case, the trial court determined entitlement to attorney’s fees in…
-
Chaphe v. Chaphe, 19 So. 3d 1019 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…sonable attorney’s fees should judicial enforcement of the agreement becomes necessary. We do not reach this issue. A ruling which merely establishes entitlement to attorney’s fees without setting the amount is not appeal-able. See Miller v. Miller, 801 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Bator v. Osborne, 983 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). The order is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. KAHN and BENTON, JJ, concur. . The former husband had previously obtained a protec…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ritter v. Ritter, 690 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
- Ritchie v. Ritchie, 687 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Singletary v. Mickey Virden, 696 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Carlson v. Andree Carlson, 696 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)