Sell v. Sell

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sell v. Sell

870 So. 2d 833, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 12341, 2003 WL 21919905

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 13, 2003

DocketNo. 3D03-1083

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 870 So. 2d 833 (Sell v. Sell) 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

Sell v. Sell, 870 So. 2d 833, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 12341, 2003 WL 21919905 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Wife, Marilyn R. Sell, appeals from an order awarding temporary support, determining entitlement to temporary attorneys’ fees, and determining the validity of a pre-nuptial agreement between herself and Louis F. Sell. We affirm that portion of the order awarding temporary alimony to the Wife, including the amount of temporary alimony currently to be paid and retroactively as well. We also affirm that portion of the order determining that the Wife is entitled to temporary attorneys’ fees.

We treat the Wife’s appeal from that portion of the order determining the validity of the parties’ pre-nuptial agreement, which is not subject to review under Rule 9.130, as a petition for writ of certiorari and deny the writ on the grounds that irreparable harm cannot be demonstrated [834]*834since validity of the agreement is subject to review at the end of this action.

FLETCHER and WELLS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Wife, Marilyn R. Sell, appeals from an order awarding temporary support, determining entitlement to temporary attorneys’ fees, and determining the validity of a pre-nuptial agreement between herself and Louis F. Sell. We affirm that portion of the order awarding temporary alimony to the Wife, including the amount of temporary alimony currently to be paid and retroactively as well. We also affirm that portion of the order determining that the Wife is entitled to temporary attorneys’ fees.

We treat the Wife’s appeal from that portion of the order determining the validity of the parties’ pre-nuptial agreement, which is not subject to review under Rule 9.130, as a petition for writ of certiorari and deny the writ on the grounds that irreparable harm cannot be demonstrated [834]*834since validity of the agreement is subject to review at the end of this action.

FLETCHER and WELLS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

870 So. 2d 833, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 12341, 2003 WL 21919905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sell-v-sell-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack