VERDASCO v. VAZQUEZ (2025)

Eduardo Verdasco (“Husband”) appeals the trial court's final judgment dissolving his marriage to Dynirie De La Caridad Vazquez (“Wife”). He contends the trial court erred in (1) awarding the Wife ultimate decision-making authority regarding the minor child's education and healthcare; (2) awarding the Wife 50% of property that was allegedly nonmarital; and (3) awarding the Wife all her attorneys’ fees and costs. Absent legal error, each of these issues is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See Quiceno v. Bedier, 387 So. 3d 365, 366 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (parental responsibility); Rojas v. Otero, 49 Fla. L. Weekly D2257, *1, ––– So.3d ––––, ––––, 2024 WL 4758004, *–––– (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 13, 2024) (equitable distribution); Iannuzzelli v. Lovett, 981 So. 2d 557, 559 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (attorney's fees).

The Wife produced competent substantial evidence via her testimony to support her request for ultimate decision-making authority concerning the minor child's education and healthcare, and the Husband failed to rebut this evidence. The Husband also failed to properly raise the issue of the status as allegedly nonmarital property and failed to produce any evidence to support his contention. Finally, the trial court properly considered each party's need and ability to pay prior to awarding the Wife her attorneys’ fees and costs.

Finding no legal error or abuse of discretion, we affirm.

PER CURIAM.