McPherson v. Bittner

126 So. 3d 1230, 2012 WL 5232293, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18499
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 24, 2012·No. No. 4D12-156·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the award of fees in this modification of child support case. He appealed the award in the trial court, which we affirmed. McPherson v. Bittner, 88 So.3d 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). We awarded appellate fees, thus determining entitlement. He now appeals the trial court’s fee award, claiming a lack of entitlement. He is bound by the law of the case, as appellee’s entitlement to attorney’s fees was already determined in the prior appeal. Dicks ex rel. Montgomery v. [1231]*1231Jenne, 740 So.2d 576, 578 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (law of the case doctrine prevents an appellate court from reconsidering questions of law considered by a previous appellate panel, unless there has been a material change in the evidence, controlling law has changed, or adhering to the prior decision would result in a manifest injustice).

Affirmed.

DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur. WARNER, J., concurs specially with opinion.

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

McPherson v. Bittner, 126 So. 3d 1230, 2012 WL 5232293, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18499 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

126 So. 3d 1230 (McPherson v. Bittner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rose Lannquist Gouldy v. Timothy Michael Chiasson
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2026
Theodore Ryan v. City of Boynton Beach, etc., and Frank Janots
157 So. 3d 417 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)
B.K. v. S.D.C.
122 So. 3d 980 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)