Mowe v. Mowe

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mowe v. Mowe

734 So. 2d 602, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9095, 1999 WL 454508

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 7, 1999

DocketNo. 98-151

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 734 So. 2d 602 (Mowe v. Mowe) 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

Mowe v. Mowe, 734 So. 2d 602, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9095, 1999 WL 454508 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The parties have appealed and cross-appealed the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We affirm the distribution of property and the alimony award. Because the former husband’s income is substantially greater than the former wife’s, the trial court abused its discretion in ordering [603]*603each party to pay his or her own attorney’s fees. See, e.g., Sever v. Sever, 684 So.2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Tanck v. Tanck, 675 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Accordingly, we affirm the final judgment except as to the trial court’s failure to order the former husband to pay the former wife’s attorney’s fees.

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

BARFIELD, C.J., KAHN and DAVIS, JJ„ CONCUR.

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

PER CURIAM.

The parties have appealed and cross-appealed the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We affirm the distribution of property and the alimony award. Because the former husband’s income is substantially greater than the former wife’s, the trial court abused its discretion in ordering [603]*603each party to pay his or her own attorney’s fees. See, e.g., Sever v. Sever, 684 So.2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Tanck v. Tanck, 675 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Accordingly, we affirm the final judgment except as to the trial court’s failure to order the former husband to pay the former wife’s attorney’s fees.

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

BARFIELD, C.J., KAHN and DAVIS, JJ„ CONCUR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

734 So. 2d 602, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9095, 1999 WL 454508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mowe-v-mowe-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack