KAREN RAMSEY BURNS, FORMERLY KAREN RAMSEY SNEDAKER, APPELLANT,
v.
SAMUEL CURRY SNEDAKER, 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 denied the motion for attorney's fees on appeal because the moving party failed to allege need and ability to pay.
After a prior custody reversal, the mother petitioned for modification of custody, which the trial court denied. The trial court also awarded the fath…
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 Presumption Of Correctness Of Trial Court Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The marriage of the parties was dissolved by final judgment by which custody of the child of the marriage was awarded to the mother, but that aspect of the final judgment was reversed by this court. See Snedaker v. Snedaker, 327 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). The child’s mother, appellant sub judice, thereafter remarried and petitioned for modification and award of custody, alleging a change in circumstances. The trial judge denied the petition and awarded the husband, appellee here, attorney’s fees pursuant to Florida Statute 61.16. This appeal followed.
It is axiomatic that the orders of a trial judge reach an appellate court clothed with a presumption of correctness. Our review of the record fails to reveal error. Appellee has filed a motion for an award of attorney’s fees incident to this appeal. Allowance of attorney’s fees on appeal is governed by the same considerations as those applicable in the court from whence the appeal emanates. Although appellee has requested attorney’s fees, his motion fails to allege his need or appellant’s ability to pay. See Johnson v. Johnson, 346 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977) and Patterson v. Patterson, 348 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). Therefore, although appellee prevails in the appeal there is no basis for our determination as to whether or not an attorney’s fee may be properly allowed. Though it is appropriate, when we determine that an award of attorney’s fees is proper, to remand the case to the trial court for the purpose of taking evidence to determine the amount of the award we do not deem it appropriate, in a domestic relations matter, that the case be remanded for the trial court to determine whether or not any fee should be allowed for services of an attorney incident to the appeal. Accordingly, the motion for attorney’s fees is denied.
Motion denied.
BOYER, C. J., and McCORD and MILLS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dresser v. Dresser, 350 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)…te factors in the attorney’s services. Our increasing concern with the reliability of assuming continued economic disparity between the parties during the appeal led a panel of this court to depart from our prevailing practice in Burns v. Snedaker, 348 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). Relying on prior decisions which were concerned with the adequacy of allegations and proof of the requisites for fee money awards in trial courts, the court stated: “Although appellee has requested attorney^ fees, his motion fa…
-
Avie Lee Thornton v. Lacy Thornton, Jr., 433 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)…of assuming continued economic disparity between the parties during appeal are discussed in Dresser v. Dresser, 350 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). In that case, the First District receded from its prior practice, as set forth in Burns v. Snedaker, 348 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), and opted for a case-by-case approach and utilization of a provisional order with remand to the trial court for a determination of need and ability. We agree with the concept set forth in Ludemann v. Ludemann, 317 So. 2d 860 (F…
Authorities Cited
- Patterson v. Patterson, 348 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Johnson v. Johnson, 346 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Snedaker v. Snedaker, 327 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)