Morris v. Morris

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Morris v. Morris

62 So. 3d 1215, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8452, 2011 WL 2268737

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 10, 2011

Docket5D10-672

StatusPublished

This text of 62 So. 3d 1215 (Morris v. Morris) 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

Morris v. Morris, 62 So. 3d 1215, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8452, 2011 WL 2268737 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The former husband, Gary Lee Morris, timely appeals a final judgment awarding attorney’s fees and costs to the former wife in the amount of $69,069.82. We agree with the former husband that under the facts of this case the trial court should have set the fee and cost award off against the $98,800 that the former wife owed him based upon his overpayment of alimony. *1216 See Novack v. Novack, 210 So.2d 215 (Fla. 1968); Selembo v. Selembo, 591 So.2d 1112 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). In all other respects, we affirm. Accordingly, we remand this matter to the trial court with directions to set off the fee and cost award entered in favor of the former wife against the final judgment entered in favor of the former husband.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

TORPY, LAWSON, and COHEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The former husband, Gary Lee Morris, timely appeals a final judgment awarding attorney’s fees and costs to the former wife in the amount of $69,069.82. We agree with the former husband that under the facts of this case the trial court should have set the fee and cost award off against the $98,800 that the former wife owed him based upon his overpayment of alimony. *1216 See Novack v. Novack, 210 So.2d 215 (Fla. 1968); Selembo v. Selembo, 591 So.2d 1112 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). In all other respects, we affirm. Accordingly, we remand this matter to the trial court with directions to set off the fee and cost award entered in favor of the former wife against the final judgment entered in favor of the former husband.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

TORPY, LAWSON, and COHEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 So. 3d 1215, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8452, 2011 WL 2268737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-v-morris-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack