Winters v. Winters

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Winters v. Winters

491 So. 2d 1299, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1693, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9237

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 5, 1986

DocketNo. 86-341

StatusPublished

This text of 491 So. 2d 1299 (Winters v. Winters) 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

Winters v. Winters, 491 So. 2d 1299, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1693, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9237 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case was previously before this court in Winters v. Winters, 464 So.2d 200 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), wherein the husband appealed from the trial court’s order requiring him to pay $9,000 of the wife’s $11,000 of attorney’s fees. In reversing that order, we held that “the trial court abused its discretion in requiring the husband to pay attorney’s fees in an amount well beyond his financial ability.” We remanded for reconsideration of the award by the trial court concordant with the parties’ relative needs and abilities.

Upon remand, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing to determine the parties’ relative financial circumstances. The wife’s attorney again requested that she be awarded her attorney’s fees, now at $17,-200, as a result of the further litigation, and the trial court so ordered. In light of the evidence adduced, which demonstrated that the relative earning capacities of the parties are roughly equivalent, we find the order to be excessive and in contravention of the law of the case as set forth in Winters. Consequently, we reverse the order. Additionally, in order to bring an end to this lingering and costly litigation, we now determine that the husband should be required to pay $6,000 toward the wife’s attorney's fees, which is inclusive of both the previous fees and the additional fees claimed under the present trial court order.

Accordingly, the order under review is vacated and modified.

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

PER CURIAM.

This case was previously before this court in Winters v. Winters, 464 So.2d 200 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), wherein the husband appealed from the trial court’s order requiring him to pay $9,000 of the wife’s $11,000 of attorney’s fees. In reversing that order, we held that “the trial court abused its discretion in requiring the husband to pay attorney’s fees in an amount well beyond his financial ability.” We remanded for reconsideration of the award by the trial court concordant with the parties’ relative needs and abilities.

Upon remand, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing to determine the parties’ relative financial circumstances. The wife’s attorney again requested that she be awarded her attorney’s fees, now at $17,-200, as a result of the further litigation, and the trial court so ordered. In light of the evidence adduced, which demonstrated that the relative earning capacities of the parties are roughly equivalent, we find the order to be excessive and in contravention of the law of the case as set forth in Winters. Consequently, we reverse the order. Additionally, in order to bring an end to this lingering and costly litigation, we now determine that the husband should be required to pay $6,000 toward the wife’s attorney's fees, which is inclusive of both the previous fees and the additional fees claimed under the present trial court order.

Accordingly, the order under review is vacated and modified.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

491 So. 2d 1299, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1693, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winters-v-winters-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack