Northup v. NorthupNorthup v. Northup
This is аn appeal by the former wife of the appellee from an ordеr of the Circuit Court denying her petition for an increase in alimony and child support.
The parties entered into a separation agreement which was ratified and made a part of the final decree. The agreement provided, in part, that the appellee would pay the appellant $150.00 per month alimony, $150.00 per month support for each of the two minor children, and also pay all and' any medical or dental bills in excess of $25.00 incurred fоr services rendered to the two children.
The plaintiff-appellant’s petition alleged that the appellee was one month in arrears' in his pаyment of the amounts due for alimony and child support; that the defendant owеd the plaintiff $375.00 for medical expenses on behalf of the children. The pеtition further alleged that there had been an increase in the children’s exрenses and that the earnings of the defendant had greatly increased sincе the entry of the final decree of divorce. The petition also cоntained a prayer for an allowance for
The defendant denied that he was in arrears in alimony and support payments. He also рetitioned the court for an order amending its final decree to relieve him from further alimony and support payment until further order of the court.
The chancellor heard the evidence of the parties and entered his order denying the plaintiff’s petition for increase in child support, and defendant’s рetition to modify the final decree. The order neither granted nor denied thе plaintiff’s prayer for medical expenses, which she incurred over and above the amount of the $25.00 per month as provided for in the final decree.
The appellant here contends that the chancellor erred whеn he denied the relief she sought in her petition. We have considered her сontentions, and hold that error was committed with regard to the following: first, we feеl that the appellant presented a valid claim for the medical bills incurred on behalf of the children. There is an issue raised as to the interpretation of the following provision in the final divorce decree of 1962:
“The husband hereby agrees that he shall be responsible for and pay all and any mediсal or dental bills in excess of $25.00 incurred for services rendered to their minor sons.”
This language is ambiguous, and we hereby resolve it to mean that, in the event any single medical or dental bill for any one month exceeds $25.00 then the husband is liable for the entire amount, and not just for the excess over and above $25.00.
We alsо find error in denying the appellant her costs, plus a reasonable allоwance for attorney fees for certain portions of the proceedings. The respondent husband affirmatively sought a reduction in the amount of alimony provided in the final divorce decree; the court should have awаrded attorney fees to the wife in that portion of the proceedings, since her attorney’s efforts were then directed towards enforcing part of the original decree. Waller v. Waller, Fla.App.1968,
In all other respects, the decree stands affirmed. Reversed in part and remanded for the entry of a decree consistent with this opinion.