SHAPIRO v. FARAJZADEH (2021)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Lawrence SHAPIRO, Appellant, v. Leyla FARAJZADEH, Appellee.

No. 3D21-333

Decided: October 06, 2021

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY and HENDON, JJ.

Lawrence J. Shapiro & Associates, P.A., and Lawrence J. Shapiro, for appellant. Richard A. Schurr, P.A., and Richard A. Schurr, and Bonnie M. Sack, for appellee.

Affirmed. See Rose v. Rose, 883 So. 2d 348, 349–50 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (“Trial courts have broad discretion in ordering the payment of temporary fees and costs based upon the parties’ respective need and ability to pay. In the present case, we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's well-reasoned order which requires the husband to pay the wife's temporary attorney's fees and costs in order to equalize the representation of the parties.”); Sinclair v. Sinclair, 804 So. 2d 589, 592 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (“Our review reveals that there is competent, substantial evidence supporting the findings made by the trial court. The trial court is in the best position to weigh the evidence and to determine the credibility of the witnesses, and it is not for this court to re-weigh the evidence or to substitute its judgment for that of the trial court.”).

PER CURIAM.

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Out of date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