Abolila v. Abolila

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Abolila v. Abolila

823 So. 2d 300, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11580, 2002 WL 1842650

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 14, 2002·No. No. 3D01-2640·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Doyle v. Doyle, 789 So.2d 499, 503 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (“Whether to grant an award of attorney’s fees is a matter within the trial court’s sound discretion; therefore, absent a showing of abuse of that discretion, the decision cannot be reversed.”) (citations omitted); Randle-Eastern Ambulance Service, Inc. v. Vasta, 360 So.2d 68, 69 (Fla.1978) (holding that voluntary dismissal terminates the trial court’s jurisdiction); Miles v. Champlin, 805 So.2d 1085, 1087 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (“[A] trial court has discretion to make a reduction of child support retroactive to the date the petition for modification was filed, whenever ‘equity requires.’ ”) (emphasis added); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13, 16 (Fla.1976) (“It is not the function of the appellate court to substitute its judgment for that of the trial court through re-evaluation of the testimony and evidence,” but rather the test is “whether the judgment of the trial court is supported by competent evidence.”).

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Doyle v. Doyle, 789 So.2d 499, 503 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (“Whether to grant an award of attorney’s fees is a matter within the trial court’s sound discretion; therefore, absent a showing of abuse of that discretion, the decision cannot be reversed.”) (citations omitted); Randle-Eastern Ambulance Service, Inc. v. Vasta, 360 So.2d 68, 69 (Fla.1978) (holding that voluntary dismissal terminates the trial court’s jurisdiction); Miles v. Champlin, 805 So.2d 1085, 1087 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (“[A] trial court has discretion to make a reduction of child support retroactive to the date the petition for modification was filed, whenever ‘equity requires.’ ”) (emphasis added); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13, 16 (Fla.1976) (“It is not the function of the appellate court to substitute its judgment for that of the trial court through re-evaluation of the testimony and evidence,” but rather the test is “whether the judgment of the trial court is supported by competent evidence.”).

AFFIRMED.

Abolila v. Abolila, 823 So. 2d 300, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11580, 2002 WL 1842650 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

823 So. 2d 300 (Abolila v. Abolila) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related