Kane v. Kane, 469 So. 2d 933

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal and cross-appeal, we find no abuse of discretion with regard to any of the issues raised, Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1980), except for the award of attorney‘s fees, which should have been assessed entirely against the husband in view of his superior financial position. Hirst v. Hirst, 452 So.2d 1083, 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Jacobs v. Jacobs, 429 So.2d 1285 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Accordingly, the award of attorney‘s fees is reversed. The final judgment is in all other respects affirmed.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

Case Details

Case Name: Kane v. Kane

Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida

Date Published: May 28, 1985

Citations: 469 So. 2d 933; 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1327; 84-2257

Docket Number: 84-2257

Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.