Ziskind v. Hart

731 So. 2d 796, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5138, 1999 WL 233426
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 21, 1999·No. No. 99-173·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Having reviewed the briefs and the record, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in entering its order granting the former wife’s motion [797] for temporary attorney’s fees and costs. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Levy v. Levy, 713 So.2d 1025 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). We therefore affirm the trial court’s order.

Affirmed.

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

Ziskind v. Hart, 731 So. 2d 796, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5138, 1999 WL 233426 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

731 So. 2d 796 (Ziskind v. Hart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Canakaris v. Canakaris
382 So. 2d 1197 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1980)
Levy v. Levy
713 So. 2d 1025 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)