Mary Ellen Guilfoyle v Joseph Charles Guilfoyle

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Chief Judge Moon, Judges Coleman and Bray Argued at Norfolk, Virginia MARY ELLEN GUILFOYLE v. Record No. 0118-96-1 JOSEPH CHARLES GUILFOYLE MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY JUDGE RICHARD S. BRAY JULY 9, 1996 FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH Jerome B. Friedman, Judge J. Russell Fentress, IV (Goss, Meier & Fentress, on brief), for appellant. No brief or argument for appellee. Acting on remand from this Court, the trial court awarded Mary E. Guilfoyle (wife) spousal support of $2,300 per month from Joseph C. Guilfoyle (husband) and ordered husband to pay $4,000 of wife's attorney's fees. awards are inadequate. On appeal, wife complains that these We disagree and affirm the decision of the trial court. The parties are fully conversant with the record, and a recitation of the facts is unnecessary to this appeal. Under well established principles, a trial court is vested with broad discretion in awarding both spousal support, see Papuchis v. Papuchis, 2 Va. App. 130, 133, 341 S.E.2d 829, 831 (1986), and attorney's fees, see Graves v. Graves, 4 Va. App. 326, 333, 357 S.E.2d 554, 558 (1987), and we review such decrees only for an * Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication. abuse of discretion. See Graves, 4 Va. App. at 333, 357 S.E.2d at 558; Papuchis, 2 Va. App. at 133, 341 S.E.2d at 831. Here, we find that the trial court properly considered the appropriate statutory imperatives in fixing the disputed spousal support and did not abuse its discretion in awarding such support or the related attorney's fees. Accordingly, we affirm the decree. Affirmed. - 2 -

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.