Curry v. Curry

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Curry v. Curry

621 So. 2d 690, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4233, 1993 WL 114672

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 16, 1993

DocketNos. 92-00999, 92-03175

StatusPublished

This text of 621 So. 2d 690 (Curry v. Curry) 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

Curry v. Curry, 621 So. 2d 690, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4233, 1993 WL 114672 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, we have for consideration the final judgment of dissolution of marriage and resulting orders affecting the distribution of marital assets. We find no error in the trial judge’s determination of the equitable distribution of the assets of the parties. The trial judge effected a nearly equal division of the assets of the parties. We, therefore, affirm the orders on appeal affecting the distribution of marital assets.

We do find, however, that the trial judge erred in requiring appellant husband to pay the attorney’s fees of appellee wife. Wife conceded at the hearings in the trial court that she has the same earning potential as husband. That, coupled with the nearly equal distribution of marital assets, causes us to conclude that it was error to award attorney’s fees to wife. We, therefore, reverse the award of attorney’s fees to appel-lee wife.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

RYDER, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, we have for consideration the final judgment of dissolution of marriage and resulting orders affecting the distribution of marital assets. We find no error in the trial judge’s determination of the equitable distribution of the assets of the parties. The trial judge effected a nearly equal division of the assets of the parties. We, therefore, affirm the orders on appeal affecting the distribution of marital assets.

We do find, however, that the trial judge erred in requiring appellant husband to pay the attorney’s fees of appellee wife. Wife conceded at the hearings in the trial court that she has the same earning potential as husband. That, coupled with the nearly equal distribution of marital assets, causes us to conclude that it was error to award attorney’s fees to wife. We, therefore, reverse the award of attorney’s fees to appel-lee wife.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

RYDER, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

621 So. 2d 690, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4233, 1993 WL 114672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curry-v-curry-fladistctapp-1993.