Barnette v. Barnette

658 So. 2d 1246, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8867, 1995 WL 497295
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 23, 1995·No. No. 94-1833·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After filing a petition for dissolution, the parties executed a settlement agreement; however, former wife subsequently asserted that she was entitled to reject one provision of the agreement, involving the division of the equity in the marital home, and that the equity should be allocated differently than was provided for in the agreement. The trial court enforced the provision and assessed attorney’s fees against the wife solely because of her refusal to accept the husband’s offer to settle, which was consistent with the provision in the agreement that the court enforced. We affirm the court’s enforcement of the agreement, but reverse the attorney’s fee award because it was not based on any provision of the agreement or any statute. The court did not award fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1993), and in any event, fees could not have been justified on that ground.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

DELL, KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

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

Barnette v. Barnette, 658 So. 2d 1246, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8867, 1995 WL 497295 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

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

Related

Aue v. Aue
685 So. 2d 1388 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)