Wasileski v. Warga

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wasileski v. Warga

867 So. 2d 1220, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 2945, 2004 WL 438497

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 11, 2004

DocketNo. 1D02-2439

StatusPublished

This text of 867 So. 2d 1220 (Wasileski v. Warga) 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

Wasileski v. Warga, 867 So. 2d 1220, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 2945, 2004 WL 438497 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s determination to impose attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes. We do, however, find error in the apportionment of fees. Accordingly, we vacate that portion of the order and remand with directions that the order require the “attorney’s fee to be paid to the [former wife] in equal amounts by the [former husband] and the [former husband’s] attorney.” § 57.105(1), Fla. Stat. (1999).

AFFIRMED.

BARFIELD, KAHN and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s determination to impose attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes. We do, however, find error in the apportionment of fees. Accordingly, we vacate that portion of the order and remand with directions that the order require the “attorney’s fee to be paid to the [former wife] in equal amounts by the [former husband] and the [former husband’s] attorney.” § 57.105(1), Fla. Stat. (1999).

AFFIRMED.

BARFIELD, KAHN and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

867 So. 2d 1220, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 2945, 2004 WL 438497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wasileski-v-warga-fladistctapp-2004.