About Us

Who Are We

ALLISON M. PERRY’s practice is limited to appellate law and litigation support, with her practice focused on family law appellate matters. Allison has handled over 500 appellate cases throughout Florida’s appellate courts and has over 200 published opinions. She founded The Law Office of Allison M. Perry, P.A. in 2001, and founded Florida Appeals, P.A. in 2015, which continues all aspects of her former law office with the addition of mediation services at the trial and appellate levels.

Allison is an active member of the Hillsborough County Bar Association, serving on the Marital and Family Law Section’s Executive Board from 2002 – 2019. She has had numerous articles published in the Lawyer magazine, Hillsborough County Bar Association’s monthly magazine. She is the former Co-Chair of the Appellate Practice Section and the Availability of Legal Services Committee of the Hillsborough County Bar Association. She has been a member of the Family Law Inn of Court in Tampa since 2002.

Allison received J.D. degree, cum laude, from Tulane University Law School, and graduated from North Carolina State University Magna Cum Laude with a degree in Economics and a degree in Business Management. She is a member of Omincron Delta Epsilon, the honor society in Economics. She lives in Tampa with her daughter, Audrey, and their boxer, Lucy.

A Sample of Some of Allison’s Favorite Wins

A.H. v. A.B., 314 So.3d 1293 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (Father’s child support amount reversed with instructions to recalculate his child support obligation).

Rotunda v. Rotunda, 305 So.3d 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (limited alimony award affirmed along with the majority of the Final Judgment).

A.A. v. D.W., 326 So.2d 1186 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (Final Judgment’s timesharing reversed due to inconsistencies in the Final Judgment).

Sunderwirth v. Suderwirth, 332 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022) (Mother’s child support obligations reversed with instructions that Mother’s finance’s contributions should not be treated as in-kind income to the Mother).

Jackman v. Cebrink-Swartz, 334 So.3d 653 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (fact that homeowner could not show that neighbor’s camera recordings had been published to third party was not a basis for denial of temporary injunction).

Lauterbach v. Lauterbach, ___ So.3d ___ (Fla. 2d DCA April 15, 2020) (trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over wife’s dissolution petition because neither party spent anytime in Florida the six month’s prior to the filing of her petition, order granting exclusive use of marital home and awarding wife $15,800 per month in temporary alimony was void).

Will v. Will, 277 So.3d 182 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019) (trial court failed to calculate appropriate amount of alimony – permanent alimony award reversed and imputation of income to husband reversed; funds husband spent on daughter’s rafting trip did not amount to intentional misconduct that resulted in dissipation of marital assets; and findings were insufficient to support requirement that husband maintain life insurance policy).

Gudur v. Gudur, 277 So.3d 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019) (it was an abuse of discretion to award the husband $190,000 from wife’s minority interest in a business without setting a definite payment date; error to allocate all of husband’s marital student loans to him; remanded for court to reconsider the husband’s request for attorney’s fees and to consider awarding permanent alimony instead of durational alimony).

Pelphrey-Weigand v. Weigand, 283 So.3d 822 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019) (the principles of res judicata prohibited husband from recovering attorney’s fees from the wife; attorney’s fee award reversed and remanded).

Frederick v. Frederick, 257 So.3d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018) (mortgage on nonmarital property was not “marital debt”; wife was entitled to credit for one-half of marital funds used to pay down husband’s nonmarital mortgage).

Duncan v. Brickman, 233 So.3d 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (order reducing father’s timesharing was impermissible contempt sanction; three year delay between hearing and ruling on contempt motions was abuse of discretion).

Kallett v. Kastriner, 225 So.3d 967 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (parties’ stipulation did not represent an unambiguous permanent waiver of ex-husband’s right to seek modification of his alimony obligation).

Perez v. Perez, 190 So.3d 1154 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (child support guidelines are applicable to temporary support orders; temporary support order was required to identify support as either alimony or child support.

Bryan v. Jemal, 198 So.3d 723 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (contempt order could not, consistent with due process, order contemnor to report to jail to serve a six-month sentence in the event he failed to purge the contempt within a specific time frame).

Weaver v. Weaver, 95 So.3d 1029 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (allocation of uncovered medical, vision, and dental expenses for minor children should have been in same percentage as child support obligation).

Brend v. Brend, 56 So.3d 923 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (trial court erroneously computed child support based upon parties’ gross income rather than their net incomes as required by law).

Conners v. Mullins, 27 So.3d 199 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (trial court utilized incorrect legal standard in ordering that mother and child return to state; reversed and remanded for court to reconsider relocation statute.

Oglesby v. Oglesby, 921 So.2d 849 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (wife’s entitlement to a share of husband’ military pension was not enforceable by contempt; ambiguity of final judgment as to portion of pension required remand).

Bogos v. Bogos, 952 So.2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (former wife’s due process rights required that she be given an opportunity to present evidence of her financial need for appellate fees).

May v. May, 908 So.2d 558 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (trial court should have reversed jurisdiction to determine attorney’s fees in its final judgment).

Martinez v. Martinez, 911 So.2d 288 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (child support obligations must be based upon parties’ net incomes not gross incomes; child’s uncovered medical expenses were required to be covered by the parents on a pro-rata basis).

Cartwright v. Cartwright, 902 So.2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (timesharing schedule reversed because written schedule did not match judge’s oral ruling; requirement that parties contribute equally to children’s private school was unsupported by evidence).

Sheridan v. Sheridan, 899 So.2d 469 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (trial court abused its discretion in modifying custody without making any finding that custodial parent’s actions constituted detriment to child).

Nault v. Nault, 883 So.2d 894 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (award of $25,000 in temporary attorney’s fees was not an abuse of the trial court’s discretion).

Areizaga v. Spicer, 841 So.2d 494 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (temporary order requiring father to pay half of child’s travel expense supported by competent substantial evidence; trial court’s prior adverse rulings are not legally sufficient grounds upon which to base motion to disqualify judge)

Johnson v. Johnson, 821 So.2d 1275 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (rotating custody award reversed with instructions for mother to be named the primary residential parent and for the court to fashion a scheduled where the child spends the majority of his time with the mother; child support reversed).

Meighen v. Meighen, 813 So.2d 173 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (amount of permanent alimony award was an abuse of the trial court’s discretion; error to impute full-time employment income to wife when evidence showed wife needed to remain home with the parties’ special needs child; payments from wife’s mother should not have been considered income to the wife; regular financial support husband received from his parents should have been considered income to the husband; trial court abused its discretion awarding on 50% of the wife’s trial attorney’s fees to her).

(813) 254-2626