Albert v. Albert

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Albert v. Albert

690 So. 2d 734, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3129, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 851

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 2, 1997

DocketNos. 95-4355, 96-0402

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 690 So. 2d 734 (Albert v. Albert) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Albert v. Albert, 690 So. 2d 734, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3129, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 851 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal and cross appeal from a judgment of dissolution of marriage. Although the former husband has raised several issues on appeal, we affirm as to all but one — the award of attorney’s fees and costs to the former wife. The equitable distribution of the marital assets left the parties in substantial financial parity. Under these circumstances, it was an abuse of discretion for the trial judge to require the former husband to pay the former wife’s attorney’s fees and costs. Kovar v. Kovar, 648 So.2d 177, 179 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).

[735]*735As to the former wife’s cross appeal, having carefully considered the merits, we affirm.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

GUNTHER, C.J., and DELL and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal and cross appeal from a judgment of dissolution of marriage. Although the former husband has raised several issues on appeal, we affirm as to all but one — the award of attorney’s fees and costs to the former wife. The equitable distribution of the marital assets left the parties in substantial financial parity. Under these circumstances, it was an abuse of discretion for the trial judge to require the former husband to pay the former wife’s attorney’s fees and costs. Kovar v. Kovar, 648 So.2d 177, 179 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).

[735]*735As to the former wife’s cross appeal, having carefully considered the merits, we affirm.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

GUNTHER, C.J., and DELL and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

690 So. 2d 734, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3129, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albert-v-albert-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack