HomeMy WebLinkAbout0289 "It is not necessary that one spouse
be completely unable to pay attorneys' fees
in order for the trial court to require the
other spouse to pay these fees. Given the
complexity of the cause and the time necessary
to appropriately resolve the issues, the
award of attorneys' fees in this case was
proper to avoid an inequitable diminution
of the fiscal sums granted the wife in these
proceedings."
We conclude that there has been no demonstration of reversible
i
error on the part of the trial court in awarding wife's counsel
$5,000 which represented only part of the attorneys' fees charged
to wife. There is no attack made on the amount of this fee. The
fee does not appear to be punitive but appears to have been asses-
sed on the basis of the additional work made necessary by the
vexatious, oppressive and wanton conduct of the husband during the
divorce proceedings. Our review of the record in this regard
1
demonstrates adequate evidence to support the award based upon
additional work made necessary by the husband's conduct during the
proceedings and on the theory enunciated in Canakaris that to deny
fees would work an inequitable diminution in the sums awarded the
wife in the-proceedings. We, therefore, affirm the award of
attorneys' fees and costs.
AFFIRMED.
i
SOSG~.8
1990 t~QV -3 PN ~ 23
f1LEC +~nC' % Lt:i : U
C rt :e, ~i~s
1rC/.11..~'~ T
HERSEY and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.
-4-
~,x342
_ ~
~ .