Howell v. Howell

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Howell v. Howell

301 So. 2d 781

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 13, 1974

DocketNo. 74-6

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 301 So. 2d 781 (Howell v. Howell) 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

Howell v. Howell, 301 So. 2d 781 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

BOARDMAN, Judge.

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order modifying a final judgment dissolving the marriage of the parties. The order of modification changed child custody as to one child, Lisa, and increased support payments to the child remaining in her mother’s custody.

Subsequent to the filing of this appeal by the mother, the father returned Lisa to her mother’s custody and resumed payment of child support, as provided in the final judgment of dissolution, at the premodifi-cation rate. The record here discloses that appellee has indicated in an affidavit, as well as in his brief, that he is desirous of a return to the status quo as it existed prior to the entry of the order of modification. In view of the appellee’s position, the only issue raised on appeal which need be decided relates to the adequacy of the fee awarded appellant’s attorney for his services in the trial court. On this point we decline to disturb the amount of the award

The cause is hereby remanded for the entry of an order placing custody of the child back in the mother and re-establishing the child support payments at the rate which was in effect prior to these modification proceedings.

MANN, C. J., and GRIMES, J., concur.

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

BOARDMAN, Judge.

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order modifying a final judgment dissolving the marriage of the parties. The order of modification changed child custody as to one child, Lisa, and increased support payments to the child remaining in her mother’s custody.

Subsequent to the filing of this appeal by the mother, the father returned Lisa to her mother’s custody and resumed payment of child support, as provided in the final judgment of dissolution, at the premodifi-cation rate. The record here discloses that appellee has indicated in an affidavit, as well as in his brief, that he is desirous of a return to the status quo as it existed prior to the entry of the order of modification. In view of the appellee’s position, the only issue raised on appeal which need be decided relates to the adequacy of the fee awarded appellant’s attorney for his services in the trial court. On this point we decline to disturb the amount of the award

The cause is hereby remanded for the entry of an order placing custody of the child back in the mother and re-establishing the child support payments at the rate which was in effect prior to these modification proceedings.

MANN, C. J., and GRIMES, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 So. 2d 781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howell-v-howell-fladistctapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack