Legal Opinion

Higginbotham v. Higginbotham

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 5, 2011No. 3D10-2310Published

1Opinion of the Court

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

Although we agree that the wife was not limited to the $5,000 cap on attorneys’ fees provided by the parties’ ante-nuptial agreement, even though the agreement as a whole was upheld below, see Belcher v. Belcher, 271 So.2d 7 (Fla.1972); Johnson v. Johnson, 946 So.2d 1132 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Mulhern v. Mulhern, 446 So.2d 1124 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Blanton v. Blanton, 413 So.2d 453 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Young v. Young, 322 So.2d 594 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), we find the $305,640.00 in “temporary” fees granted her, essentially for litigating the validity of the prenup, excessive…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Rosen v. RosenSupreme Court of Florida · 1997
  2. Cummings v. CummingsSupreme Court of Florida · 1976
  3. Belcher v. BelcherSupreme Court of Florida · 1972
  4. Bullard v. BullardDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
  5. Mulhern v. MulhernDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API