State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services ex rel. McCarthy v. McCarthy

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services ex rel. McCarthy v. McCarthy

645 So. 2d 1082, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11490

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 30, 1994·No. No. 93-02499·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

THREADGILL, Judge.

The appellants challenge a final order denying a petition to establish child support filed pursuant to the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA). We affirm the denial of the petition without comment.

The appellants also challenge the trial court’s determination that the appellee is entitled to have his attorney’s fees paid by the appellants with the amount to be set at a later date. However, this court has recently held that an order determining entitlement alone is a nonappealable, nonfinal order. See McIlveen v. McIlveen, 644 So.2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); see also Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc. v. Newman, 641 So.2d 915 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). We therefore dismiss the appeal as to entitlement to attorney’s fees without prejudice to a subsequent appeal from a final order setting the amount of fees.

Affirmed in part; dismissed in part.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and QUINCE, J., concur.

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

THREADGILL, Judge.

The appellants challenge a final order denying a petition to establish child support filed pursuant to the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA). We affirm the denial of the petition without comment.

The appellants also challenge the trial court’s determination that the appellee is entitled to have his attorney’s fees paid by the appellants with the amount to be set at a later date. However, this court has recently held that an order determining entitlement alone is a nonappealable, nonfinal order. See McIlveen v. McIlveen, 644 So.2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); see also Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc. v. Newman, 641 So.2d 915 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). We therefore dismiss the appeal as to entitlement to attorney’s fees without prejudice to a subsequent appeal from a final order setting the amount of fees.

Affirmed in part; dismissed in part.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and QUINCE, J., concur.

State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services ex rel. McCarthy v. McCarthy, 645 So. 2d 1082, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11490 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

645 So. 2d 1082 (State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services ex rel. McCarthy v. McCarthy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related