Preston v. Preston

221 So. 2d 219, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5926
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Preston v. Preston. Read the opinion of the Court — 216 So. 2d 31
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 15, 1969·No. No. 68-908·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By this appeal, the appellant seeks review of certain post decree orders entered subsequent to a judgment of divorce. The several orders here under review be and the same are hereby affirmed.

The order as to attorney’s fees is affirmed, without prejudice to the appellant’s counsel seeking attorney fees in the trial court for any proceedings directly relating to enforcement of the original judgment of divorce. See; McNeill v. McNeill, Fla.1952, 59 So.2d 57; Blunda v. Blunda, Fla.1958, 101 So.2d 41; Metz v. Metz, Fla.App.1959, 108 So.2d 512; Teply v. Key, Fla.App.1964, 158 So.2d 549; Wilner v. Wilner, Fla.App.1964, 167 So.2d 234; Salomon v. Salomon, Fla.App.1966, 186 So.2d 39; § 61.15, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.

Affirmed.

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

Preston v. Preston, 221 So. 2d 219, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5926 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

221 So. 2d 219 (Preston v. Preston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Salomon v. Salomon
186 So. 2d 39 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)
McNeill v. McNeill
59 So. 2d 57 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1952)
Metz v. Metz
108 So. 2d 512 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1959)
Blunda v. Blunda
101 So. 2d 41 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1958)
Teply v. Key
158 So. 2d 549 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1963)
Wilner v. Wilner
167 So. 2d 234 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1964)