Queen v. Queen

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Queen v. Queen

495 So. 2d 862, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2130, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10048

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 8, 1986

DocketNo. 85-2543

StatusPublished

This text of 495 So. 2d 862 (Queen v. Queen) 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

Queen v. Queen, 495 So. 2d 862, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2130, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10048 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s award of alimony and child support to the wife. However, we find it reversible error to award the automobile to the wife in light of the parties’ financial circumstances and the husband’s need for the car. Furthermore, the trial court’s award of the attorney’s fees to the wife was not based on substantial competent evidence as required. See Cohen v. Cohen, 400 So.2d 463 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); and Jacobsen v. Jacobsen, 414 So.2d 34 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Therefore, we reverse the order awarding attorney’s fees and remand for a proper evidentiary hearing.

[863]*863AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.

DOWNEY, WALDEN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s award of alimony and child support to the wife. However, we find it reversible error to award the automobile to the wife in light of the parties’ financial circumstances and the husband’s need for the car. Furthermore, the trial court’s award of the attorney’s fees to the wife was not based on substantial competent evidence as required. See Cohen v. Cohen, 400 So.2d 463 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); and Jacobsen v. Jacobsen, 414 So.2d 34 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Therefore, we reverse the order awarding attorney’s fees and remand for a proper evidentiary hearing.

[863]*863AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.

DOWNEY, WALDEN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

495 So. 2d 862, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2130, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10048, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/queen-v-queen-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack