Baime v. Baime

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Baime v. Baime

912 So. 2d 1273, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17235, 2005 WL 2861580

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 2, 2005

DocketNo. 4D05-160

StatusPublished

This text of 912 So. 2d 1273 (Baime v. Baime) 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

Baime v. Baime, 912 So. 2d 1273, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17235, 2005 WL 2861580 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse, in part, a final order to the extent that it includes an income deduction order. In all other respects, we affirm. Section 61.1301, Florida Statutes, does not allow income deduction orders to be used solely for the payment of attorney’s fees. Spalding v. Spalding, 813 So.2d 1078, 1079 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).

In Spalding, this court disallowed an income deduction order for attorney’s fees because the fees were not incurred in “securing payment of support or alimony.” Id. Here, the fees resulted from actions brought by both parties to modify child support, not the enforcement or securing of same.

We, therefore, remand for modification accordingly.

STONE, SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur.

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