Lovett v. Lovett

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lovett v. Lovett

194 So. 2d 916

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 8, 1967

DocketNo. 6812

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 194 So. 2d 916 (Lovett v. Lovett) 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

Lovett v. Lovett, 194 So. 2d 916 (Fla. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

SHANNON, Acting Chief Judge.

This is an appeal from a final decree of divorce, granted to the appellee-husband. Appellant contends that a divorce should not have been granted to the husband, but thát her complaint for separate maintenance should have been granted. She also challenges the adequacy of the allowance of alimony and child support. The evidence was in conflict on all of these issues. Since the appellant has failed to clearly show that the chancellor abused his discretion, the decree appealed from is affirmed. Frazier v. Frazier, Fla.App.1966, 191 So.2d 865; Lauray v. Lauray, Fla.App.1966, 181 So.2d 670; and Clutter v. Clutter, Fla.App.1965, 171 So.2d 544.

The appellant’s attorney has petitioned this court for attorney fees for services rendered before this court, which we grant in the sum of Three Hundred ($300.-00) Dollars.

LILES, J., and LEAVENGOOD, C. RICHARD, Associate Judge, concur.

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

SHANNON, Acting Chief Judge.

This is an appeal from a final decree of divorce, granted to the appellee-husband. Appellant contends that a divorce should not have been granted to the husband, but thát her complaint for separate maintenance should have been granted. She also challenges the adequacy of the allowance of alimony and child support. The evidence was in conflict on all of these issues. Since the appellant has failed to clearly show that the chancellor abused his discretion, the decree appealed from is affirmed. Frazier v. Frazier, Fla.App.1966, 191 So.2d 865; Lauray v. Lauray, Fla.App.1966, 181 So.2d 670; and Clutter v. Clutter, Fla.App.1965, 171 So.2d 544.

The appellant’s attorney has petitioned this court for attorney fees for services rendered before this court, which we grant in the sum of Three Hundred ($300.-00) Dollars.

LILES, J., and LEAVENGOOD, C. RICHARD, Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 So. 2d 916, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lovett-v-lovett-fladistctapp-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack