TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

McAllister v. McAllister

Amelia Elizabeth McAllister v. Robert Edgar McAllister

McAllister v. McAllister, 191 So. 303 (Fla. 1939)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Florida · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 6, 1939
Judges
Terrell, Whitfield, Buford, Chapman, Thomas, Brown, Compiled, Laws, Rules
Citations
191 So. 303140 Fla. 2071939 Fla. LEXIS 1087

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

Per Curiam. — Robert Edgar McAllister brought suit for divorce against Amelia Elizabeth McAllister. The defendant petitioned the Court for an allowance of attorneys’ fees and suit money as authorized by Section 4986. Compiled General Laws of 1927. Before the latter petition' was ruled on, the chancellor referred the cause to a special master to take testimony on the merits.

Petition for certiorari was filed in this Court, the usual *208 notice was given, and an order was granted staying all proceedings in the court below until the petition for certiorari is disposed of. Should the petition for suit money and attorneys’ fees have been adjudicated before taking testimony on the merits, is the question presented. The sufficiency of the bill is also challenged.

Under Section 4986, Compiled General Laws of 1927, a petitioner is entitled to counsel fees and suit money if her petition therefor shows that she lacks sufficient means to support herself during the litigation and with -which to employ counsel. It must be further shown that the husband has ' mean's to supply this necessity. The chancellor may exercise his discretion about determining these matters but they should be settled before the defendant is required to enter and begin her defense. We find in the record an order of reference to take testimony on this point. We will not assume that the chancellor will not have this evidence taken and dispose of the petition for counsel’s fees and suit money in due course. The bill of complaint is not amenable to the assault made on it.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed, that the petition for certiorari be and is hereby denied.

It is so ordered.

Terrell, C. J., Whitfield, Buford, Chapman and Thomas, J. J., concur.

Justice Brown not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1958: 11963: 11965: 11970: 119582026peak 1958 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Scherer v. Scherer150 So. 2d 496 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1963) · Dissent
  2. Gary v. Gary237 So. 2d 575 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970) · Dissent
  3. Vecsey v. Vecsey100 So. 2d 437 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1958)
  4. Mandina v. Davidson171 So. 2d 906 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1965)

Most recent

  1. Gary v. Gary237 So. 2d 575 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970) · Dissent
  2. Mandina v. Davidson171 So. 2d 906 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1965)
  3. Scherer v. Scherer150 So. 2d 496 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1963) · Dissent
  4. Vecsey v. Vecsey100 So. 2d 437 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1958)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list