Kinne v. Kinne

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kinne v. Kinne

272 So. 2d 865

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 7, 1973

DocketNo. 72-421

StatusPublished

This text of 272 So. 2d 865 (Kinne v. Kinne) 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

Kinne v. Kinne, 272 So. 2d 865 (Fla. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant wife seeks review of the order granting appellee husband’s petition for modification of the final decree of divorce as to custody of the children of the marriage and the denial to her of attorneys’ fees and arrearages in child support and visitation expenses.

We have carefully considered the record, briefs and arguments of counsel and have concluded that appellant has failed to show an abuse of the chancellor’s discretion either in the granting of child custody to appellee husband, or in denying appellant’s claims for child support and visitation expense arrearages. However, we are of the opinion that the chancellor did abuse his discretion' in denying appellant attorneys’ fees. See Colbath v. Colbath, Fla.1972, 268 So.2d 361.

Therefore, the final order appealed from is hereby affirmed except insofar as it denied the appellant attorneys’ fees.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions to award reasonable attorneys’ fees for the services of appellant’s attorneys.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant wife seeks review of the order granting appellee husband’s petition for modification of the final decree of divorce as to custody of the children of the marriage and the denial to her of attorneys’ fees and arrearages in child support and visitation expenses.

We have carefully considered the record, briefs and arguments of counsel and have concluded that appellant has failed to show an abuse of the chancellor’s discretion either in the granting of child custody to appellee husband, or in denying appellant’s claims for child support and visitation expense arrearages. However, we are of the opinion that the chancellor did abuse his discretion' in denying appellant attorneys’ fees. See Colbath v. Colbath, Fla.1972, 268 So.2d 361.

Therefore, the final order appealed from is hereby affirmed except insofar as it denied the appellant attorneys’ fees.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions to award reasonable attorneys’ fees for the services of appellant’s attorneys.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 So. 2d 865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kinne-v-kinne-fladistctapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack