Dandorph v. Dandorph

486 So. 2d 693, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 896, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7284
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 16, 1986·No. No. 85-1113·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find no abuse of discretion or reversible error as concerns the award of only $6,000.00 in lump sum alimony to the husband.

Considering the gross disparity in the financial circumstances of the parties, we are of the opinion that the trial court erred in denying the husband’s claim for attorney’s fees. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Johns v. Johns, 423 So.2d 443 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).

We affirm in part; reverse in part; and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith.

HERSEY, C.J., and WALDEN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

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

Dandorph v. Dandorph, 486 So. 2d 693, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 896, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7284 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

486 So. 2d 693 (Dandorph v. Dandorph) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Johns v. Johns
423 So. 2d 443 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Canakaris v. Canakaris
382 So. 2d 1197 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1980)