TERRY L. FREDRICKSON, APPELLANT,
v.
GAIL M. FREDRICKSON, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2010-12-01
No. 4D09-3608
HAZOURI, CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
47 So. 3d 975 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2010) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Topics
Ripeness For Review Premature Appeal Modification Of Alimony Attorney'S Fees

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Ripeness For Review cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The husband appeals an order denying his petition for modification of alimony. We affirm, as competent substantial evidence supports the trial court’s conclusion that even if the husband sustained a decrease in income, the change was not permanent or involuntary. We find no error in the court’s treatment of business reimbursements, nor is the husband’s combined support obligation excessive. The husband also challenges an order requiring .him to pay the wife’s attorney’s fees and costs. Because the amount has not yet been set, this issue is not ripe for review. See Winkelman v. Toll, 632 So.2d 130 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Trisotto v. Trisotto, 966 So.2d 986 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the appeal as premature.

Affirmed in part; dismissed in part.

HAZOURI, CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Perini v. Darcia Charlene Perini, 322 So. 3d 124 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021)
    …termines the entitlement but not the amount is unripe for appellate review. See Weimer v. Weimer, 677 So. 2d 86, 88 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). Thus, we dismiss without prejudice the appeal of this issue as premature. See Fredrickson v. Fredrickson, 47 So. 3d 975, 975 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). Affirmed in part; dismissed in part. FORST, KLINGENSMITH, and ARTAU, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.…
  • Suzanna Leiper v. Leiper, 331 So. 3d 233 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021)
    …fees. The trial court determined entitlement to attorney’s fees but did not ascertain the amount. An order that determines the entitlement but not the amount of attorney’s fees is unripe for appellate review. E.g., Fredrickson v. Fredrickson, 47 So. 3d 975, 975 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); Weimer v. Weimer, 677 So. 2d 86, 88 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). Thus, while we affirm all other issues raised in this appeal, we dismiss without prejudice the appeal of the trial court’s determination of entitlement to attorne…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw