Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

572 So. 2d 535

Brown v. Brown

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 5, 1990

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1990-12-05

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1995

1 state decisions

Relies on 382 So. 2d 1197 - Canakaris v. Canakaris · 502 So. 2d 1002 - Blankenship v. Blankenship · Ball v. Ball

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1990-12-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

RYDER, Acting Chief Judge.

¶1Herman H. Brown seeks review of the trial court’s second amended final judgment of dissolution of marriage with regard to distribution of marital assets, alimony and attorney’s fees. We affirm the distribution of marital assets and the award of permanent alimony, but reverse the award of attorney’s fees to the former wife.

¶2The trial court’s distribution of marital assets and award of permanent alimony to the wife was reasonable and was not an abuse of discretion. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980). Should there be a change in circumstances, Mr. Brown may seek modification of the alimony award. Canakaris; Henderson v. Henderson, 463 So.2d 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).

¶3In this ease, the distribution of assets was equal or, if unequal, it was unequal in favor of the former wife. This, in addition to the award of permanent alimony left her with ample resources to pay her attorney’s fees. An award of attorney’s fees to the wife under these circumstances is an abuse of discretion. Ball v. Ball, 554 So.2d 629 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Blankenship v. Blankenship, 502 So.2d 1002 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987).

¶4Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

PARKER and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
/572/so2d/535 · .json · Public domain