Case ID: so2d_579/html/0210-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Marvin Harold REINICHE, Appellant, v. Betty REINICHE and Betty Jean Investments, Inc., Appellees.
    No. 90-2696.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 24, 1991.
    Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied June 6, 1991.
    Adam S. Doner of McGee, Jordan, Shuey, Gordon, Morris & Doner, P.A., Lake Worth, for appellant.
    Ross J. McKelvey, Jr., Pompano Beach, for appellee-Betty Reiniche.
    John P. Seiler and John R. Gillespie, Jr., of Dykema Gossett, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee-Betty Jean Investments, Inc.
   FASTRACK APPEAL

PER CURIAM.

The husband raises two issues in his appeal from a final judgment in the parties’ dissolution action, one of which we conclude to have merit. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part and remand with direction to proceed in accordance herewith.

The parties, married almost twenty years at the time of the dissolution, were in substantially different financial positions because of a prenuptial agreement. The husband has demonstrated an inability to pay his attorney’s fees and costs and the wife’s financially superior position.

We find that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding the husband only twenty-five percent of his attorney’s fees, rather than requiring the wife to pay all of the husband’s reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197, 1205 (Fla.1980).

HERSEY, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and STONE, JJ., concur.