JANIS ALTMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
ANDREW ALTMAN, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the final judgment denying all attorney’s fees to the former wife. According to the trial judge, the “main” reason for its ruling was that the former wife’s attorney was her second husband, from whom she was divorced in 2002. The trial court was concerned that the obligation for fees was not a “legitimate debt” and that the former wife would “not be ultimately responsible” for the fees. This was not a valid basis to deny all fees. See Love v. Love, 370 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979) (stating, in a divorce case, that “[a]s to an award of attorney’s fees, we see no reasonable basis on which to distinguish a client of a Legal Aid Society from one who retains private counsel”).
The case is remanded to the trial court for reconsideration of the request for attorney’s fees under the principles of Rosen v. Rosen, 696 So. 2d 697 (Fla.1997).
WARNER, KLEIN and GROSS, JJ, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
C.J.T. v. State, 76 So. 3d 1139 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…commitment of a delinquent to the department must be for an indeterminate period of time ...; however, the period of time may not exceed the maximum term of imprisonment that an adult may serve for the same of-fense_” As we held in J.A. W. v. State, 873 So. 2d 523, 524 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), “The problem with the sentencing order in this case is that it could be interpreted as permitting commitment until the child reached the age of nineteen, well past the one-year maximum length of commitment for a first-degre…
-
B.G. v. State, 137 So. 3d 548 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…court has held that a “disposition order must specify the period of commitment imposed by the court.” Q.K. v. State, 945 So. 2d 650, 651 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (quoting S.B. v. State, 834 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)); see [*549] also J.A.W. v. State, 873 So. 2d 523, 524 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (“The disposition order must clearly articulate the maximum length of commitment.”). The disposition order committing B.G. failed to specify the statutory maximum for the offenses, as well as his age. Thus, it is impossible…
Authorities Cited
- Rosen v. Rosen, 696 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1997)
- Love v. Love, 370 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)