Medina v. Medina
This text of 461 So. 2d 1028 (Medina v. Medina) 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.
Opinion
In the final judgment dissolving the marriage between the parties, the trial court specifically reserved jurisdiction “for the purpose of determining the amount of Attorneys Fees [sic] to be awarded from the Husband to the Wife.” From a subsequent order awarding certain of the husband’s personal property to the wife as partial payment of attorney’s fees, the husband appeals. We reverse.
Attorney’s fees may be awarded to a party only under three circumstances: 1) pursuant to a contract; 2) pursuant to a valid statute; and 3) where awarded for services performed by an attorney in creating or bringing into the court a fund or other property. McElhiney v. Ash Properties, Inc., 411 So.2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Here, the authority to award attorney’s fees to the wife arises by virtue of § 61.16, Florida Statutes (1983) which provides:
The court may from time to time, after considering the financial resources of both parties, order a party to pay a rea[1029]*1029sonable amount for attorney’s fees, suit money, and the cost to the other party of maintaining or defending any proceeding under this chapter, including enforcement and modification proceedings. The court may order that the amount be paid directly to the attorney, who may enforce the order in his name.
The “Order Awarding Attorney’s Fees” makes no determination of a reasonable amount to be awarded as attorney’s fees.1 A paragraph in the proposed order was drawn in such form as would have made this determination, but the paragraph was stricken.
The order appealed from is thus erroneous because it fails to determine the amount of the reasonable attorney’s fee to be awarded the wife. It is also erroneous because it purports to make a further distribution of property between the parties when the court no longer had jurisdiction to do so. The final judgment reserved jurisdiction only to determine the amount of the fee to be awarded.
We therefore reverse the order appealed from insofar as it purports to award the husband’s property to the wife as partial payment of attorney’s fees, and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. We find no merit to appellant’s remaining points, and as to those issues, the order appealed from is affirmed.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
461 So. 2d 1028, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 148, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 11913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/medina-v-medina-fladistctapp-1985.