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.
RONALD BRIAN WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. SAMANTHA SMITH WILLIAMS, Appellee.
The Former Husband, Ronald Brian Williams, seeks review of a nonfinal order awarding the Former Wife, Samantha Smith Williams, temporary attorneys’ fees in the amount of $75,000. We affirm, without discussion, the portion of the order concluding that the Former Wife is entitled to temporary fees. However, because the trial court failed to make findings as to the reasonableness of both the hourly rate charged and the hours claimed, we reverse the portion of the order awarding $75,000 in temporary fees and remand to the trial court for a determination of the reasonable amount of fees to be awarded.1
When considering a request for attorneys’ fees in a dissolution proceeding “[t]he trial court must ‘not only determine that one spouse has a need for suit money and the other has the ability to pay, but also that the temporary attorney's fees and costs awarded are reasonable.’ ” Kasm v. Kasm, 933 So. 2d 48, 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (quoting Safford v. Safford, 656 So. 2d 485, 486 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)). This court has “consistently required that an award of temporary attorneys’ fees be accompanied by factual findings regarding reasonableness of the hourly rates and time expended.” Chhouri v. Chhouri, 2 So. 3d 987, 988 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (first citing Ghay v. Ghay, 954 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); and then citing Kasm, 933 So. 2d at 48). Accordingly, we reverse the portion of the order awarding the $75,000 in temporary attorneys’ fees and remand for the trial court to make the appropriate findings in determining the reasonable amount of attorneys’ fees to be awarded. See Chhouri, 2 So. 3d at 988; Kasm, 933 So. 2d at 50; Safford, 656 So. 2d at 486.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
FOOTNOTES
1. To the extent the Former Wife argues the order should be affirmed as a sanction, the order expressly states that the trial court reserved ruling on the Former Wife's motion for contempt.
SMITH, Judge.
NORTHCUTT and GUARD, 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. 2D2025-1777
Decided: August 14, 2026
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second 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.
Make It a Preferred Google Search Source
Add to GoogleGet 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)