Alford v. Alford

489 So. 2d 1246, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1408, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8455
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 24, 1986·No. No. BK-32·Published

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The wife appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, raising three issues: (1) that the primary residence of the parties’ minor child should be with the wife; (2) that the wife should have been awarded lump sum alimony in accordance with her contribution to the marriage and the parties’ individual financial conditions; and (3) the husband should be required to pay the wife’s attorney’s fees. We affirm.

Although there is conflict in the evidence, there is competent substantial evidence to support the trial judge’s ruling on all three issues. The wife has shown no abuse of discretion in the trial judge’s findings and we should not substitute our judgment for that of the trial judge on matters within his discretion. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980).

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON and ERVIN, JJ„ concur. BOOTH, C.J., concurs in part and dissents in part.

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

Alford v. Alford, 489 So. 2d 1246, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1408, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8455 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

489 So. 2d 1246 (Alford v. Alford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Walden v. Walden
483 So. 2d 87 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Canakaris v. Canakaris
382 So. 2d 1197 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1980)
In the Interest of Brown
246 So. 2d 166 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1971)