From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frantz v. Frantz

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 10, 1984
453 So. 2d 429 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion

No. 83-2871.

June 26, 1984. Rehearing Denied August 10, 1984.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Edward S. Klein, J.

Smith Mandler and Jonathan A. Heller, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Richard H.W. Maloy, Coral Gables, for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., HUBBART, J., and WINIFRED J. SHARP, Associate Judge.


The order denying the ex-wife an increase in alimony is affirmed on the ground that the record supports an application of the principle that

an increase in the husband's ability would not itself justify an upward modification of alimony if the wife's needs are already fully met either by the existing award or otherwise. See generally 10A Fla.Jur. Dissolution of Marriage § 53 (1973).
Powell v. Powell, 386 So.2d 1214, 1216, n. 6 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

Since both parties were unsuccessful in their respective motions for modification, we likewise find no merit in Ms. Frantz' assertion of error in the denial of her claim for attorney's fees. See Jaffee v. Jaffee, 394 So.2d 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Frantz v. Frantz

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 10, 1984
453 So. 2d 429 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

Frantz v. Frantz

Case Details

Full title:DORIS FRANTZ, APPELLANT, v. LEONARD FRANTZ, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Aug 10, 1984

Citations

453 So. 2d 429 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

Young v. Young

As we would express the "true rule," there must also be an increase in the children's needs which may be met…

Schlesinger v. Emmons

This exception is no more than an elaboration on our oft-repeated rule that an increase in the paying…