JOHN E. CARTER, FORMER HUSBAND, APPELLANT,
v.
BARBARA L. CARTER, FORMER WIFE, 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.
In this family law appeal, the trial court denied both parties' requests to modify alimony, found the former husband owed $6,064 in arrearages, and awarded the former wife $7,500 in attorney's fees. The appellate court reversed the arrearage calculation and attorney's fees award due to insufficient evidentiary findings, while affirming the denial of modification requests.
The court reversed the arrearage calculation and attorney's fees award. The arrearage must be remanded for recalculation with proper findings, and the attorney's fees award must be remanded for a hearing to allow the former wife to present evidence supporting her claim, since she presented no evidence at the initial hearing.
[1] An award of attorney's fees must be supported by specific findings regarding hourly rate, number of hours reasonably expended, and the appropriateness of any reduction or…
[2] A trial court's determination of alimony arrearage must be supported by competent, substantial evidence and include findings explaining the calculation.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“this figure is not supported by competent, substantial evidence, and the court's order contains no findings as to how it arrived at this amount”
Establishes the standard that arrearage calculations must be supported by evidence and documented findings
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe former husband appealed an order that denied his request to modify his monthly alimony obligation. The trial court determined he owed $6,064 in pa…
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 Attorney'S Fees Award cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal concerns an order of the trial court that denied both parties’ requests to modify Appellant/Former Husband’s monthly alimony obligation. The order also determined that Former Husband owed Appellee/Former Wife $6,064 in past-due alimony, and awarded Former Wife $7,500 in attorney’s fees. We write to address the trial court’s calculation of the alimony arrearage and its award of attorney’s fees to Former Wife, which we hold merits reversal. We affirm all other aspects of the trial court s order without comment.
The trial court’s order determined the alimony arrearage owed by Former Husband to be $6,064; however, this figure is not supported by competent, substantial evidence, and the court’s order contains no findings as to how it arrived at this amount. On appeal, both parties argue that the trial court’s arrearage determination is erroneous, albeit for different reasons. Because the testimony is conflicting, we remand this issue for the trial court to make the appropriate findings and recalculate the alimony arrearage based on the evidence contained in the record.
Further, we reverse the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees to Former Wife because the court’s order does not set forth the specific findings required in Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 1985), as to hourly rate, number of hours reasonably "expended, and the appropriateness of any reduction or enhancement factors. Manuel v. Manuel, 498 So.2d 1369, 1370 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). The record contains no evidence supporting the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees, which generally precludes remand .for entry of an appropriate order. Davis v. Davis, 613 So.2d 147,147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Viera v. Viera, 698 So.2d 1308, 1309 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). But here, the record shows that Former Wife presented no evidence during the hearing, because she requested that the trial court reserve the issue of fees, due to the fact that additional fees were being incurred contemporaneously, and it appears that the trial court acquiesced to Former Wife’s request. For this reason, we remand for a hearing to allow Former Wife to present evidence establishing her claim to attorney’s fees. .
*990AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.
B.L. THOMAS, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, 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)
- Manuel v. Manuel, 498 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Trammell v. Showell Farms & Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 613 So. 2d 147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- Viera v. Viera, 698 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)