ROBERT CONLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
ANN CONLEY, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1959-07-03
No. 1204
KANNER and SHANNON, JJ., concur.
113 So. 2d 448 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1959)

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.

Synopsis

This case involves an interlocutory appeal concerning an order for temporary support money during a pending divorce suit. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, finding no grounds for reversal.


Holding

No, the lower court did not err in granting temporary support money. The granting of such support is within the discretion of the trial judge, and there was no basis in the record to reverse that decision.


Key Quotes

“The granting of temporary alimony and other expenses during the divorce suit was within the discretion of the trial judge.”

Establishes the standard of review for the lower court's decision.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The parties separated after a few weeks of marriage. The wife returned to her own apartment. The husband presented a disputed agreement, allegedly rel…

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.


Opinion of the Court
ALLEN, Chief Judge.

*449ALLEN, Chief Judge.

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order allowing the appellee-wife support money during the pendency of the suit.

The parties separated about August 10, 1958, and the appellee returned to her own apartment where she had lived prior to the marriage. The parties had only been married for a few weeks. The defendant, at the preliminary hearing on alimony, filed an agreement which is not dated and there is dispute as to whether it was executed before or after August 20, 1958. The appellee claims that at the time of the hearng she was then pregnant.

It is claimed by the appellant that under the agreement above referred to he is not liable for any support money. The lower court did not pass upon the validity vel non of the agreement.

The granting of temporary alimony and other expenses during the divorce suit was within the discretion of the trial judge.

The appellee has petitioned for attorney’s fees on this appeal, which we shall allow in the sum of $200.

We find nothing in this record upon which to reverse the lower court.

Affirmed.

KANNER and SHANNON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw