McCallum v. McCallum, 77-2309
| Decision Date | 15 November 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 77-2309,77-2309 |
| Parties | Shelia McCALLUM, Appellant, v. Rodney H. McCALLUM, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Karl F. Loucks, II, of Scott, Burk, Royce, Harris & Loucks, P. A., Palm Beach, for appellant.
Walter N. Colbath, Jr., of Campbell, Colbath, Kapner & Fine, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
This appeal involves the denial of the appellant/wife's request for attorneys' fees in a post-decretal domestic relations matter. The marriage was dissolved by final judgment of January 20, 1976. Subsequent thereto the wife filed a petition for modification but did not include in said petition a request for attorneys' fees. The Court ruled on the petition for modification by order of April 4, 1977, and on August 5, 1977, the appellant/wife filed a motion to tax attorneys' fees and costs. The motion for attorneys' fees was filed after the rehearing and appeal time had run on the order entered granting the petition for modification. The trial court eventually dismissed the wife's request for attorneys' fees with prejudice. We find the trial court to have been completely correct in doing so. See, Frumkes v. Frumkes, 328 So.2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), and Reardon v. Reardon, 355 So.2d 207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Appellant argues that a reservation of jurisdiction regarding attorneys' fees was contained in the initial final judgment and that this reservation requires a different result. This argument is without merit since the reservation in the initial final judgment related to past attorneys' fees rather than future attorneys' fees. Indeed, attorneys' fees were eventually taxed for the services rendered on the securing of the final judgment of dissolution. The fees in question here relate to post-decretal matters only, and the absence of a request for the fees left the Court without jurisdiction to order same. The order below is therefore affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Levy v. Levy
...which are incorporated herein by reference. In contrast to the case upon which the appellants heavily rely, McCallum v. McCallum, 364 So.2d 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978), 2 this reservation did not relate only to "past attorneys' fees rather than future attorneys' fees." More important, again unli......
-
Bailey v. Bailey, 80-903
...final judgment in the absence of a reservation of jurisdiction. Oyer v. Boyer, 383 So.2d 717 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); McCallum v. McCallum, 364 So.2d 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Church v. Church, 338 So.2d 554 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Frumkes v. Frumkes, 328 So.2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). The issue of whe......
-
Finkelstein v. North Broward Hosp. Dist.
...contain the magic words "jurisdiction is reserved." Defendants cite Oyer v. Boyer, 383 So.2d 717 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); McCallum v. McCallum, 364 So.2d 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); and Frumkes v. Frumkes, 328 So.2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), to support their contention that the trial court lacked juri......
-
Jeffcoat v. Heinicka
...See, e.g., Jackson v. Jackson, 390 So.2d 787 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Oyer v. Boyer, 383 So.2d 717 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); McCallum v. McCallum, 364 So.2d 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Church v. Church, 338 So.2d 544 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Frumkes v. Frumkes, 328 So.2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Appellees repl......