VIKER v. CHERRY (2019)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Katherine Hiett VIKER, Appellant, v. Arthur Collin CHERRY, Appellee.

No. 1D18-0866

Decided: July 15, 2019

Emilian “Ian” Bucataru, Tallahassee, for Appellant. A. Collin Cherry of Law Office of Collin Cherry, P.L., Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Appellant challenges the trial court's orders pertaining to a modification of the parties' parenting plan, modification of the parties' child support arrangement, and appellant's motion for attorney's fees.

We dismiss as to the issues pertaining to the parenting plan and the child support arrangement for lack of jurisdiction because appellant failed to timely appeal those orders. Shaffer v. Shaffer, 84 So. 3d 1075 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Mendoza v. Mendoza, 842 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003).

The sole remaining issue appellant raises is the trial court's denial of her motion for attorney's fees. We find no error with the trial court's order denying her motion and affirm accordingly.

Affirmed in part and Dismissed in part.

Per Curiam.

Wolf, Rowe, and Bilbrey, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network