Warnhoff v. Warnhoff

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Warnhoff v. Warnhoff

493 So. 2d 52, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1831

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 20, 1986

Docket85-2843

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 493 So. 2d 52 (Warnhoff v. Warnhoff) 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

Warnhoff v. Warnhoff, 493 So. 2d 52, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1831 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

493 So.2d 52 (1986)

Georgia E. WARNHOFF, Appellant,
v.
Frank A. WARNHOFF, Appellee.

No. 85-2843.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

August 20, 1986. Rehearing Denied September 22, 1986.

*53 S. Robert Zimmerman of S. Robert Zimmerman, P.A., Pompano Beach, for appellant.

Deborah Marks of Deborah Marks, P.A., North Miami, for appellee.

STONE, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order, pursuant to section 61.16, Florida Statutes, denying an attorney's fee award to the wife in a post-judgment contempt proceeding for nonpayment of alimony.

We recognize that among the factors for the trial court to consider in the exercise of its discretion to award fees is the contempt of the noncomplying spouse. Planes v. Planes, 477 So.2d 42 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Patterson v. Patterson, 399 So.2d 73 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). It is also true that it is not necessary that one spouse be completely unable to pay in order for the trial court to order that the other spouse pay attorney's fees. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1980); Patterson v. Patterson, 399 So.2d 73 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). However, the financial resources of the parties, including need and ability to pay, remain among the factors for the court to consider. See Patterson v. Patterson, 348 So.2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). See also McIntyre v. McIntyre, 434 So.2d 61 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Andrews v. Andrews, 409 So.2d 1135 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Here, the ability of the husband to pay an attorney's fee award was in dispute and the appellant had assets from which her attorneys could be paid. The trial judge had the discretion to find that the wife failed to meet her burden of proof in these respects. Child v. Child, 474 So.2d 299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).

The appellant has failed to show on appeal that there was a lack of substantial competent evidence in support of the court's order and has failed to meet her burden. The record does not support a finding of an abuse of discretion. See Marcoux v. Marcoux, 464 So.2d 542 (Fla. 1985); Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1980).

AFFIRMED.

ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

493 So.2d 52 (1986)

Georgia E. WARNHOFF, Appellant,
v.
Frank A. WARNHOFF, Appellee.

No. 85-2843.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

August 20, 1986. Rehearing Denied September 22, 1986.

*53 S. Robert Zimmerman of S. Robert Zimmerman, P.A., Pompano Beach, for appellant.

Deborah Marks of Deborah Marks, P.A., North Miami, for appellee.

STONE, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order, pursuant to section 61.16, Florida Statutes, denying an attorney's fee award to the wife in a post-judgment contempt proceeding for nonpayment of alimony.

We recognize that among the factors for the trial court to consider in the exercise of its discretion to award fees is the contempt of the noncomplying spouse. Planes v. Planes, 477 So.2d 42 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Patterson v. Patterson, 399 So.2d 73 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). It is also true that it is not necessary that one spouse be completely unable to pay in order for the trial court to order that the other spouse pay attorney's fees. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1980); Patterson v. Patterson, 399 So.2d 73 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). However, the financial resources of the parties, including need and ability to pay, remain among the factors for the court to consider. See Patterson v. Patterson, 348 So.2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). See also McIntyre v. McIntyre, 434 So.2d 61 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Andrews v. Andrews, 409 So.2d 1135 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Here, the ability of the husband to pay an attorney's fee award was in dispute and the appellant had assets from which her attorneys could be paid. The trial judge had the discretion to find that the wife failed to meet her burden of proof in these respects. Child v. Child, 474 So.2d 299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).

The appellant has failed to show on appeal that there was a lack of substantial competent evidence in support of the court's order and has failed to meet her burden. The record does not support a finding of an abuse of discretion. See Marcoux v. Marcoux, 464 So.2d 542 (Fla. 1985); Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1980).

AFFIRMED.

ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

493 So. 2d 52, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1831, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/warnhoff-v-warnhoff-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Georgia E. WARNHOFF, Appellant, v. Frank A. WARNHOFF, Appellee.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Georgia E. WARNHOFF, Appellant,
v.
Frank A. WARNHOFF, Appellee.