No syfertize treatment data for cluster 10128700.
Christopher A. Burr
v.
Mabelly Beatriz Matute Ospino
v.
Mabelly Beatriz Matute Ospino
3D2023-1207.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Oct 2, 2024.
Published
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed October 2, 2024.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1207
Lower Tribunal No. 20-18347
________________
Christopher A. Burr,
Appellant,
vs.
Mabelly Beatriz Matute Ospino,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts Judge.
Sandy T. Fox, P.A., Sandy T. Fox, and Alisha B. Savani, for appellant.
Mabelly Beatriz Matute Ospino, in proper person.
Before LINDSEY, MILLER and GOODEN, JJ.
State of Florida
Opinion filed October 2, 2024.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1207
Lower Tribunal No. 20-18347
________________
Christopher A. Burr,
Appellant,
vs.
Mabelly Beatriz Matute Ospino,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts Judge.
Sandy T. Fox, P.A., Sandy T. Fox, and Alisha B. Savani, for appellant.
Mabelly Beatriz Matute Ospino, in proper person.
Before LINDSEY, MILLER and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Alarcon v. Dagen, 389 So. 3d 611, 614 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (holding mother’s conduct fell short of vexatious conduct which would justify an award of fees); Hallac v. Hallac, 88 So. 3d 253, 260 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (“Because the primary factors under section 61.16 require need and ability to pay, the award of attorney’s fees against the wife and in favor of the husband cannot be justified pursuant to the statutory authority. Instead, the award must be authorized under the court’s inherent authority to prevent vexatious litigation. This case, however, does not provide the type of inequitable conduct present in . . . the very rare cases where vexatious litigation is present.”).
[*2]