Carlin v. Carlin

895 So. 2d 532, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3183, 2005 WL 548241
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 10, 2005·No. No. 1D04-850·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The denial of the appellant’s petition to terminate permanent alimony is affirmed because the appellant did not preserve the issue of whether the trial court erred by considering parol evidence. The portion of the appeal challenging the non-final, non-appealable ruling that the appellee is entitled to trial level attorneys’ fees and costs, without setting an amount, is dismissed. See Scullin v. City of Pensacola, 667 So.2d 215, 215-16 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); see also JB Investments, Inc. v. John B. Kane and Co., Inc., 805 So.2d 900, 900 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).

ALLEN, DAVIS and BROWNING, JJ., Concur.

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

Carlin v. Carlin, 895 So. 2d 532, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3183, 2005 WL 548241 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

895 So. 2d 532 (Carlin v. Carlin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bac Home Loans Servicing LP v. Ridgway
143 So. 3d 956 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Morrison v. United States Ex Rel. Farm Service Agency
73 So. 3d 336 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)