DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ON BEHALF OF VANESSA CHEVOR, APPELLANT,
v.
AZAD MOHOMED, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Department of Revenue appeals a trial court order that set aside a final administrative child support order. The court holds that circuit courts lack jurisdiction to retroactively vacate or modify administrative support orders; only district courts of appeal have authority to review such orders, and circuit courts may only prospectively modify future support obligations.
A circuit court lacks jurisdiction to retroactively set aside or vacate a final administrative child support order. Only district courts of appeal have authority to judicially review administrative support orders. Circuit courts may only prospectively modify support obligations going forward, not retroactively affect the administrative order.
[1] A circuit court lacks jurisdiction to retroactively set aside a final administrative child support order.
[2] Judicial review of a final administrative support order must be sought in the appropriate district court of appeal.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A circuit court of this state, where venue is proper and the court has jurisdiction of the parties, may enter an order prospectively changing the support obligations established in an administrative support order, in which case the administrative support order is superseded and the court's order shall govern future proceedings in the ease.”
Establishes the limited prospective authority of circuit courts over administrative support orders
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Department filed a proceeding to establish a child support obligation against Azad Mohomed. A final administrative support order was entered estab…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Retroactive Modification cases and more on FLexlaw
PALMER, C.J.
The Department of Revenue (“the Department”), on behalf of Vanessa Chevor, appeals the order entered by the trial court setting aside an administrative support order. Concluding that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to retroactively set aside the administrative support order, we vacate the trial court’s order. The Department filed a notice of proceeding to establish an administrative support order to require Azad Mohomed to pay support for his child. A final administrative support order was entered establishing Mohomed’s child support obligation. The final order advised Mohomed that if he wished to appeal the support order he should file a copy of a notice of appeal and pay the required filing fee to the clerk of the First District Court of Appeal or to the clerk of the District Court of Appeal in the district where he lived. Mohomed filed no appeal. Instead, he filed a letter with the trial court in proceedings then pending in the Ninth Judicial Circuit Court. The letter contested the propriety of the administrative support order. Upon review of Mohomed’s letter, the trial court entered an order setting aside the administrative child support order based on an alleged violation of Mo-homed’s due process rights and further noted that a temporary child support order had been established by the court in a separate dissolution case involving Mo-homed. The Department appeals this order. The Department contends that the trial court’s order setting aside the administrative child support order is void, and thus must be vacated, because jurisdiction to retroactively review a final administrative child support order is vested in the district courts of appeal not in the circuit courts. We agree.
Section 409.2563(10)(a) and (c), Florida Statutes (2006), provides in pertinent part:
409.2563 Administrative establishment of child support obligations.—
* * * * *
(10) Judicial review, enforcement, or court order superseding administrative support order. * * * * *
(a) A noncustodial parent has the right to seek judicial review of an administrative support order or a final order denying an administrative support order in accordance with s. 120.68....
(c) A circuit court of this state, where venue is proper and the court has jurisdiction of the parties, may enter an order prospectively changing the support obligations established in an administrative support order, in which case the administrative support order is superseded and the court’s order shall govern future proceedings in the ease. Any unpaid support owed under the superseded administrative support order may not be retroactively modified by the circuit court, except as provided by s. 61.14(l)(a), and remains enforceable by the department, by the obligee, or by the court. In all cases in which an administrative support order is superseded, the court shall determine the amount of any unpaid support owed under the administrative support order and shall include the amount as arrearage in its superseding order. § 409.2563(a) & (c), Fla. Stat. (2006). Section 120.68(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2006), provides:
Judicial review.—
* * * * *
(2)(a)Judicial review shall be sought in the appellate district where the agency maintains its headquarters or where a party resides or as otherwise provided by law. All proceedings shall be instituted by filing a notice of appeal or petition for review in accordance with the Florida Rules of Appellate Proce dure within 30 days after the rendition of the order being appealed.
§ 120.68, Fla. Stat. (2006).
These provisions do not authorize the trial court to enter an order vacating or retroactively affecting a final administrative child .support order. As such, the trial court lacked the legal authority to vacate the instant final administrative child support order. See State, Dep’t. of Revenue ex rel. Chamberlain v. Manasala, 982 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)(holding that although a circuit court is authorized to supersede the entry of an administrative support order by entering a prospective order modifying the child support award, it is not authorized to enter an order vacating or retroactively affecting the administrative support order).
ORDER VACATED.
GRIFFIN and LAWSON, JJ, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't OF Revenue o/b/o Jason Thomas Lienhart v. Secor, 146 So. 3d 1250 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…y affect an administrative child support order entered pursuant to section 409.2563 administrative proceedings. Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Chamberlain v. Manasala, 982 So. 2d 1257, 1259 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Che-vor v. Mohomed, 996 So. 2d 900, 901-02 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). However, a circuit court does have the power to issue a superseding order changing support obligations prospectively. Hoover, 40 So. 3d at 102; Manasala, 982 So. 2d at 1259. Authority for this modification by a circuit c…
-
Dep't OF Revenue o/b/o Sharon M. Simmons v. Bryant Wardlaw, 48 So. 3d 170 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…Dep’t of Revenue v. Manasala, 982 So. 2d 1257, 1259 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (holding that circuit courts do not have jurisdiction to enter an order either vacating or retroactively affecting an administrative support order); Dep’t of Revenue v. Mohomed, 996 So. 2d 900, 901 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (explaining that “jurisdiction to retroactively review a final administrative support order is vested in the district courts of appeal not in the circuit courts”). Reversed. TAYLOR, HAZOURI and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.…
-
Dep't OF Revenue v. Hoover, 40 So. 3d 99 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)….. ”); § 409.2563(10)(a) (“The obligor has the [*102] right to seek judicial review of an administrative support order or a final order denying an administrative support order in accordance with s. 120.68.”); Dep’t of Rev. ex rel. Chevor v. Mahomed, 996 So. 2d 900, 901-02 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). In administrative child support proceedings, the circuit court plays an important enforcement role because, unlike the Department, the circuit court can enforce administrative child support orders by using its contempt…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Manasala, 982 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)