Inyang v. Tenney-Inyang

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Inyang v. Tenney-Inyang

901 So. 2d 394, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6946, 2005 WL 1123018

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 13, 2005

DocketNo. 5D04-3059

StatusPublished

This text of 901 So. 2d 394 (Inyang v. Tenney-Inyang) 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

Inyang v. Tenney-Inyang, 901 So. 2d 394, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6946, 2005 WL 1123018 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Hilary I. Inyang, the former husband, appeals the trial court’s order awarding the former wife, Robin A. Tenney-Inyang, n/k/a Robin Tenney-Ward, temporary post-dissolution attorney’s fees and costs. Temporary relief awards “are among the areas where trial judges have the very broadest discretion, which appellate courts are very reluctant to interfere with except under the most compelling of circumstances.” Mullins v. Mullins, 799 So.2d 450, 451 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (quoting Pedraja v. Garda, 667 So.2d 461, 462 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)). Having examined the record carefully, we find no abuse of discretion on the trial court’s part. Accordingly, the order awarding temporary attorney’s fees and costs is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON, ORFINGER and TORPY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Hilary I. Inyang, the former husband, appeals the trial court’s order awarding the former wife, Robin A. Tenney-Inyang, n/k/a Robin Tenney-Ward, temporary post-dissolution attorney’s fees and costs. Temporary relief awards “are among the areas where trial judges have the very broadest discretion, which appellate courts are very reluctant to interfere with except under the most compelling of circumstances.” Mullins v. Mullins, 799 So.2d 450, 451 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (quoting Pedraja v. Garda, 667 So.2d 461, 462 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)). Having examined the record carefully, we find no abuse of discretion on the trial court’s part. Accordingly, the order awarding temporary attorney’s fees and costs is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON, ORFINGER and TORPY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

901 So. 2d 394, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6946, 2005 WL 1123018, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/inyang-v-tenney-inyang-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack