From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crispin v. Crispin

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 7, 1982
411 So. 2d 218 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Opinion

Nos. 81-755, 81-1573.

February 9, 1982. Rehearing Denied April 7, 1982.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; Richard S. Hickey, Judge.

Sinclair, Louis, Siegel, Heath, Nussbaum Zavertnik and Paul A. Louis, Miami, for appellant.

Gaston, Snow, Ely, Bartlett, Hall Swann and Richard H.M. Swann, Coral Gables, for appellee.

Before NESBITT, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.


From the record presented for review, we conclude that reasonable persons could differ as to the propriety of the action taken by the trial court and, therefore, cannot find that the trial court abused its discretion. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1980). Additionally, contrary to appellant's contention, the trial court did not, ipso facto, abuse its discretion by awarding attorneys' fees in an amount less than the expert testimony offered by the appellant, notwithstanding that appellee offered no opposing expert testimony on that issue. Fatolitis v. Fatolitis, 271 So.2d 227 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Crispin v. Crispin

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 7, 1982
411 So. 2d 218 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
Case details for

Crispin v. Crispin

Case Details

Full title:MARTHA C. CRISPIN, APPELLANT, v. SAMUEL B. CRISPIN, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Apr 7, 1982

Citations

411 So. 2d 218 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Citing Cases

McIntosh v. McIntosh

With regard to the $350 fee awarded for services since the second appeal, it was not an ipso facto abuse of…