GEORGE A. CONDON
v.
MINNIE CONDON
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.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed an interlocutory order granting temporary alimony, solicitor's fees, and costs in a separate maintenance case, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion.
No, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in making the order for temporary alimony, solicitor's fees, and costs, as the sufficiency of the bill of complaint is not the primary issue on such an application.
“The only matter proper to be decided on the present appeal is whether or not the court abused its discretion in making the order appealed from under the circumstances appearing of record in the cause at the time the order was made.”
Establishes the standard of review for the appeal.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA wife filed for separate maintenance after remarrying her husband, alleging he cursed, abused, and vilified her. The trial court entered an order req…
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 Alimony Pendente Lite cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant complains of an interlocutory order requiring him to pay $100.00 solicitor’s fees for appellee’s solicitor; $10.00 fee for reporting the testimony in the case, and an order for the payment of $10.00 per week alimony pendente lite until further order of the court. Appellee’s bill for separate maintenance was brought under Section 4988 C. G. L., 3196 R. G. S. It appeared from the bill that the parties having once been divorced from each other on a suit filed by the wife, had thereafter remarried and lived together again for about two years. Both the parties had for years operated a restaurant in the City of DeLand, the wife assisting her husband in the business which was owned by him, and not charging or being paid any salary or compensation for her service. Her complaint in the present case is that she is now forced to live apart from him through his fault in cursing, abusing and villifying *100her without excuse, to such extent that it is beyond her capacity to bear. The order appealed from was entered after a hearing of evidence pro and con.
The only matter proper to be decided on the present appeal is whether or not the court abused its discretion in making the order appealed from under the circumstances appearing of record in the cause at the time the order was made. The sufficiency of the bill of complaint is not essentially in issue on an application for temporary alimony, solicitor’s fees and costs, as defects, if they exist in the bill as filed, may be amendable.
Order affirmed.
> Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Turnipseed v. Turnipseed, 158 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963)…granted or withheld by the chancellor in the exercise of sound judicial discretion, citing Thompson v. Thompson, 86 Fla. 515, 98 So. 589; and further held that the same is true under F.S. section 65.09, F.S.A., citing Condon v. Condon, 117 Fla. 98, 157 So. 177. Moyer v. Moyer, 114 So. 2d 638 (Fla.App.1959), is a case in which the record on appeal contained only the pleadings in the case. The Third District Court of Appeal, Pearson, J., affirmed on the ground that the court was unable to determine the pro…
-
McFARLIN v. McFARLIN, 75 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1954)…d or withheld by the chancellor in the exercise of sound judicial discretion. Thompson v. Thompson, 86 Fla. 515, 98 So. 589, cited in the quoted portion of the final decree, supra. The same is true under Section 65.09, Condon v. Condon, 117 Fla. 98, 157 So. 177. In fact, although Section 65.09 provides in part that “the court shall have power to grant such temporary and permanent alimony and suit money as the circumstances of the parties may render just”, while Section 65.10 states that “the court shall ma…
-
Driggers v. Pearson, 141 Fla. 256 (Fla. 1940)…bill of complaint is not essentially in issue on an application for temporary alimony, solicitors’ fees and costs, as such amendable defects as may appear in the bill may be amended prior to the entry of final decree. Condor v. Condor, 117 Fla. 98, 157 So. 177. See also in this connection, Miller v. Miller, 33 Fla. 453, 15 So. 222. Plaintiff in error contends that the citation for contempt does not affirmatively show that he is able to comply with its terms. This citation was issued June 6, 1939, and hea…