Legal Opinion

Louth v. Isom

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 12, 1993No. 92-04110PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ of prohibition to prevent the trial court from considering a motion for attorney’s fees. The petitioner contends that since the amended final judgment did not reserve jurisdiction for the consideration of the fees motion, the trial court lost jurisdiction to consider and rule upon the motion. See Frisard v. Frisard, 468 So.2d 399 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Frumkes v. Frumkes, 328 So.2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976).

This case is factually distinguishable from those relied upon by the petitioner. Here, the attorney’s fees motion is strictly limited to payment for…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Frumkes v. FrumkesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1976
  2. Frisard v. FrisardDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Louth v. WilliamsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994
  2. Louth v. WilliamsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API