Hudson v. Hudson

226 So. 2d 696, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5343
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 26, 1969·No. No. 2389·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant husband appeals from a final decree of divorce, complaining of an award to the wife of a special equity in the marital domicile of the parties and of the amount awarded the wife for alimony and attorney’s fees. The record contains substantial competent evidence to sustain the trial court’s finding of a special equity in favor of the wife, Sharpe v. Sharpe, Fla.App.1967, 202 So.2d 822. Likewise, there is a substantial evidentiary basis for the award of alimony and attorney’s fees to the wife and there being no showing that the trial court abused its discretion in regard to these items, they will not be disturbed on appeal. Bencomo v. Bencomo, Fla.App. [697]*6971967, 195 So.2d 874; Farr v. Farr, Fla.App.1964, 164 So.2d 890.

Affirmed.

CROSS, C. J., and OWEN, J., and Mac-MILLAN, HUGH, Associate Judge, concur.

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

Hudson v. Hudson, 226 So. 2d 696, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5343 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

226 So. 2d 696 (Hudson v. Hudson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sharpe v. Sharpe
202 So. 2d 822 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1967)
Farr v. Farr
164 So. 2d 890 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1964)
Bencomo v. Bencomo
195 So. 2d 874 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1967)