Fineman v. Fineman
564 So. 2d 646, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5872, 1990 WL 111933
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 8, 1990·No. No. 88-2734·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
We affirm, except as to the award of attorney’s fees.
We reverse the attorney’s fees portion of the final judgment as it lacks the specificity required by Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla.1985), and remand so the trial judge can make written findings as to the factors used in his determination of the attorney’s fees awarded the former wife.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Fineman v. Fineman, 564 So. 2d 646, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5872, 1990 WL 111933 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).
564 So. 2d 646 (Fineman v. Fineman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Durie v. Guardianship of Durie
578 So. 2d 474 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)