Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Dewey Eugene ARD, Appellant, v. Pamela Ann ARD, Appellee.
The former husband in this case, Dewey Eugene Ard (husband), appeals from the trial court's Supplemental Final Judgment of Dissolution, asserting that the court erred in its findings with respect to the equitable distribution of the parties' assets. We affirm the trial court's scheme of equitable distribution on the merits, but remand for correction of a mathematical error. The husband's total net assets were determined to be $17,825 and the total net assets of Pamela Ann Ard (wife) amounted to $5,000. The trial court required an equalization payment to the wife of $6,537.50. Because the correct amount was $6,412.50, we reverse on this point. We affirm the equitable distribution in all other respects. We also affirm that portion of the order requiring the husband to pay permanent periodic alimony to the wife.
The trial court ordered the husband to pay a part of the wife's attorney's fees in the amount of $1500. There is competent substantial evidence in the record to support an award of attorney's fees to the wife, but the trial court made no factual findings with regard to the total number of hours expended by the wife's attorney, the hourly rate, or the reasonableness of the fee. Thus, the award of attorney's fees to the wife is reversed and remanded with instructions to make the required factual findings and reconsider in accordance with the principles enunciated in Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla.1985). See Stefanowitz v. Stefanowitz, 586 So.2d 460 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
LAWRENCE, J.
MINER and WEBSTER, JJ., Concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 1D99-2576.
Decided: June 01, 2000
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida,First District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)