Reek v. Reek

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Reek v. Reek

303 So. 2d 677

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 6, 1974

DocketNo. 74-363

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 303 So. 2d 677 (Reek v. Reek) 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

Reek v. Reek, 303 So. 2d 677 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of the record, appellant’s brief and appendix, the appellee having failed to provide this court with brief and appendix, and examination of the transcript of testimony before the trial court, it appears there was no evidence introduced on the issue of attorneys’ fees. Therefore, the chancellor erred in awarding attorneys’ fees to the appellee. See Goldblatt v. Goldblatt, 277 So.2d 34 (Fla.App. 1973); Cardillo v. Cardillo, 269 So.2d 773 (Fla. App. 1972); Thoni v. Thoni, 179 So.2d 420 (Fla.App.1965); Lyle v. Lyle, 167 So.2d 256 (Fla.App.1964). Accordingly, the award of attorneys’ fees is reversed and the cause remanded for the purpose of taking of testimony on the issue of '(attorneys’ fees. In all other respects, the order appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed in part, and reversed in part and remanded with directions.

OWEN, C. J., and CROSS and MA-GER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of the record, appellant’s brief and appendix, the appellee having failed to provide this court with brief and appendix, and examination of the transcript of testimony before the trial court, it appears there was no evidence introduced on the issue of attorneys’ fees. Therefore, the chancellor erred in awarding attorneys’ fees to the appellee. See Goldblatt v. Goldblatt, 277 So.2d 34 (Fla.App. 1973); Cardillo v. Cardillo, 269 So.2d 773 (Fla. App. 1972); Thoni v. Thoni, 179 So.2d 420 (Fla.App.1965); Lyle v. Lyle, 167 So.2d 256 (Fla.App.1964). Accordingly, the award of attorneys’ fees is reversed and the cause remanded for the purpose of taking of testimony on the issue of '(attorneys’ fees. In all other respects, the order appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed in part, and reversed in part and remanded with directions.

OWEN, C. J., and CROSS and MA-GER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 So. 2d 677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reek-v-reek-fladistctapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack