Florida has no rule that the wealthier party pays. It has a 2-part test, and a Supreme Court case that widened what a court may consider.
Section 61.16 permits a court, after considering the financial resources of both parties, to order one party to pay a reasonable amount for attorney’s fees, suit money and costs. It reaches enforcement proceedings, modifications and appeals.
The Florida Supreme Court has described the purpose of the section plainly: to ensure that both parties will have a similar ability to obtain competent legal counsel.
Both prongs must be present. A party with genuine need whose counterpart can’t contribute will not receive an award. A party whose counterpart has significant resources but who has no actual need will not receive one either. You don’t have to be entirely unable to pay your own fees to qualify.
In Rosen v. Rosen, 696 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1997), the Supreme Court held that courts are not limited to financial resources when awarding fees under section 61.16. The statute should be construed liberally, to allow consideration of any factor necessary to provide justice and ensure equity between the parties.
Rosen directs courts to consider the scope and history of the litigation, its duration, the merits of the parties’ respective positions, whether a position was taken to harass, frustrate or delay, and the existence of prior or pending claims.
A fee award is not a plan. It is a possibility that depends on the other party’s resources, on your own need, and on how both sides conduct the case. It is also decided after the fees have already been incurred.
The expense a client controls is the work performed before and during the case. Identifying accounts, obtaining statements and assembling the mandatory disclosure require no law license. That work is billed at the office hourly rate when the office performs it.
The complete set walks you through the whole process in order, with the records list, the worksheets and the questions to request answers to before you sign a retainer.