PAUL A. ANDERSON, APPELLANT,
v.
VIRGINIA S. ANDERSON, 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.
The court held that anticipated future changes in circumstances are insufficient to justify modification of a final judgment of dissolution.
Appellant sought modification of a dissolution judgment based on anticipated future changes in circumstances. The lower court denied the petition.…
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 Dissolution Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
BOYER, Chief Judge.
Appellant, husband in a dissolution of marriage proceeding, here appeals the lower court’s denial of his petition for modification of the final judgment of dissolution of marriage and denial of his motion for rehearing. The appellee has filed a timely motion for attorney’s fees incident to this appeal.
The controlling question in a modification proceeding is whether there has in fact been an actual change in the circumstances of the parties since the entry of the final judgment sought to be modified; not whether there may be a change in circumstances at some future date. (See F.S. 61.14(1)) Anticipated future changes in the circumstances of a party are not sufficient to justify a modification. (See Fleischer v. Fleischer, 1942, 149 Fla. 621, 6 So. 2d 836)
Our examination of the record reveals that the learned trial judge was eminently correct in finding that the changes in circumstances urged by appellant were anticipatory and not actual. We therefore affirm. However, our affirmance is without prejudice to a proper petition in the trial court on some future date should the actual circumstances be so changed as to warrant same.
Appellee’s motion for attorney’s fees is denied.
Affirmed.
McCORD and MILLS, IT., concur.