Saulnier v. Saulnier

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Saulnier v. Saulnier

425 So. 2d 558, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 22264

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 8, 1982

DocketNos. 81-1547, 81-2189

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 425 So. 2d 558 (Saulnier v. Saulnier) 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

Saulnier v. Saulnier, 425 So. 2d 558, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 22264 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a consolidated appeal from two non-final orders. We affirm the order which denied the appellant/husband’s motion to quash service of process and to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. We reverse the order which granted appellee temporary relief by increasing the alimony being paid to her prior to final hearing on her post-judgment petition for modification filed pursuant to section 61.14, Florida Statutes [559]*559(1979). We find no authority for such award of temporary relief prior to final hearing in this post-judgment proceeding. The trial court reasoned in making the award that appellant would receive credit for the temporary increase in the event the appellee wife did not ultimately prevail in her petition. The basic flaw in such conclusion is that the husband became immediately subject to contempt for nonpayment of the temporary increase, which could have harmful, irremediable effects pendente lite should the husband ultimately prevail at final hearing. The law can provide proper relief to a party seeking post-judgment modification, without the foregoing possibility for harm, by determining the relief at final hearing and making it effective as of the date of filing the petition upon proof of entitlement thereto. Buckley v. Buckley, 343 So.2d 890 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), app. dismissed, 362 So.2d 1050 (Fla.1978).

LETTS, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is a consolidated appeal from two non-final orders. We affirm the order which denied the appellant/husband’s motion to quash service of process and to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. We reverse the order which granted appellee temporary relief by increasing the alimony being paid to her prior to final hearing on her post-judgment petition for modification filed pursuant to section 61.14, Florida Statutes [559]*559(1979). We find no authority for such award of temporary relief prior to final hearing in this post-judgment proceeding. The trial court reasoned in making the award that appellant would receive credit for the temporary increase in the event the appellee wife did not ultimately prevail in her petition. The basic flaw in such conclusion is that the husband became immediately subject to contempt for nonpayment of the temporary increase, which could have harmful, irremediable effects pendente lite should the husband ultimately prevail at final hearing. The law can provide proper relief to a party seeking post-judgment modification, without the foregoing possibility for harm, by determining the relief at final hearing and making it effective as of the date of filing the petition upon proof of entitlement thereto. Buckley v. Buckley, 343 So.2d 890 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), app. dismissed, 362 So.2d 1050 (Fla.1978).

LETTS, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

425 So. 2d 558, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 22264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saulnier-v-saulnier-fladistctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack