Vecsey v. Vecsey

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Vecsey v. Vecsey

100 So. 2d 437

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Vecsey v. Vecsey. Read the opinion of the Court — 115 So. 2d 719 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 11, 1958·No. No. 57-441·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order allowing alimony, counsel fees and suit money pendente lite. When the statutory basis for such an order is established, an appellate court will not substitute its judgment for that of the Chancellor unless a clear abuse of discretion is made to appear. Floyd v. Floyd, 91 Fla. 910, 108 So. 896; McAllister v. McAllister, 140 Fla. 207, 191 So. 303.

The briefs and appendices failing to establish an abuse of discretion on the part of the Chancellor, the order is affirmed.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order allowing alimony, counsel fees and suit money pendente lite. When the statutory basis for such an order is established, an appellate court will not substitute its judgment for that of the Chancellor unless a clear abuse of discretion is made to appear. Floyd v. Floyd, 91 Fla. 910, 108 So. 896; McAllister v. McAllister, 140 Fla. 207, 191 So. 303.

The briefs and appendices failing to establish an abuse of discretion on the part of the Chancellor, the order is affirmed.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.

Vecsey v. Vecsey, 100 So. 2d 437 (Fla. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

100 So. 2d 437 (Vecsey v. Vecsey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related