Florida Court Cases - Case Law and Opinions from the Courts of Florida - unoffical reports - Opinions

ROMINGER LEGAL

Florida Case Law & Florida Court Opinions - Florida Law

Need Legal Help?

LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER

LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS

NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE

This court case was taken from the Florida Court's web site. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
JULY TERM 2004

DANA LEVINSON,
asserted that there was a need based on the

delays in the proceedings.
Appellant,

Following a hearing at which evidence
v.
concerning the parties' incomes was introduced

to a general master, the master entered a Report
PAMELA LEVINSON,
of the Hearing Officer recommending that the

former wife's motion for temporary child
Appellee.
support be granted and that the former husband

be ordered to pay monthly child support of

$3,000, an amount which was twice what he was
CASE NO. 4D03-2685
previously paying. In addition, the general

master recommended that the obligation be

retroactive to the date the former wife filed her
Opinion filed December 22, 2004
motion.1 The general master's recommendation

was approved and adopted by order of the trial
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the
court. Thereafter, the former husband filed an
Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County;
objection to the general master's report as well
Susan Greenhawt, Judge; L.T. Case No. 98-8952
as a motion to vacate the order of the general
3792.
master. The court denied the former husband's

motion to vacate, and granted the former wife's
Cynthia L. Greene of Law Offices of Greene,
motion for temporary attorney's fees, awarding
Smith & Associates, P.A., Miami, and Law
her the sum of $100,000.
Offices of Sandor F. Genet & Associates, P.A.,

North Miami Beach, for appellant.
The trial court entered an Order and Final

Judgment directing the former husband to pay
Edna L. Caruso and Diran V. Seropian of
the former wife's fees and costs in the amount of
Edna L. Caruso, P.A., West Palm Beach, and
$110,000, and also prohibiting the former
William H. Stolberg, Fort Lauderdale, for
husband from encumbering his house except to
appellee.
pay fees and costs. At the same time, the trial

court entered a second order denying the former
SHAHOOD, J.
husband's motion to vacate and directing him to

immediately pay the back child support. These
In 1998, the marriage of the parties was
orders are the subject of this appeal.
dissolved. Among other things, their settlement

agreement addressed child support and visitation
As to the first issue, we hold that it was error
involving the parties' three minor children.
for the trial court to order the former husband to

pay temporary child support while the former
In 2002, the former wife filed a petition to
wife's petition for modification was pending. In
modify the final judgment to increase the former
Robbie v. Robbie, 726 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 4th DCA
husband's child support obligation and to
1999), we reversed an award of temporary
decrease the former husband's visitation.
alimony based on the doctrine of law of the case.
Simultaneously, she filed a motion for
That same principle applies in this case. In the
temporary fees and, some months later, filed a
parties' settlement agreement, which was
Motion for Temporary Child Support. In the

temporary support motion, the former wife
1 Based on the order, it was determined that the
amount of back support owed was $19,500.

incorporated into the final judgment of
REVERSED AND REMANDED
dissolution, matters concerning child support

were addressed and resolved. Modification of
WARNER and MAY, JJ., concur.
those terms required a hearing and specific

findings by the trial court. Until such time, the
NOT FINAL UNTIL DISPOSITION OF ANY
final judgment of dissolution was the law of the
TIMELY FILED MOTION FOR REHEARING.
case and the parties were bound by that
judgment. Id. at 820. See also Saulnier v.
Saulnier, 425 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).
We are aware that Robbie and Saulnier both
dealt with alimony modification and not child
support modification, but determine that that
distinction is not significant.

Next, we hold that the trial court abused its
discretion in ordering the former husband to pay
the former wife's temporary fees and costs in the
amount of $110,000. This appears to have been
a fairly uncomplicated modification of child
support action. Although the former wife claims
the excessive fees were the result of the former
husband's litigious conduct, the trial court did
not make such a finding. In fact, the trial court
did not make any findings to support the
conclusion that such fees, which we consider to
be excessive, were reasonable. See generally
Carlson v. Carlson, 639 So. 2d 1094 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1994) (reversing excessive fee award in
single-issue, uncomplicated modification
proceeding where trial court failed to make
appropriate findings).

Finally, we hold that the trial court erred in
prohibiting the former husband from
encumbering his property in order to secure
payment of the former wife's attorney's fees.
As we stated in Widom v. Widom, 679 So. 2d
74 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), this prohibition is
tantamount to an injunction to secure a fee
award, which is beyond the trial court's
authority.

Accordingly, we reverse the Order and Final
Judgment and remand for the trial court to
excise that portion prohibiting the former
husband from encumbering his property. We
also reverse the order awarding temporary fees
and the order on former husband's motion to
vacate and remand for proceedings consistent
with this opinion.

- 2 -

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Florida Case Law & Florida Court Opinions - Florida Law
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE