RONALD A. NOUR, APPELLANT,
v.
PATRICIA M. NOUR, 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.
In this child support modification case, the Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's order increasing support despite the wife's failure to attach a required financial affidavit to her modification petition. The court rejected a mechanical application of the financial affidavit requirement, holding that without evidence of prejudice and where substantial evidence supported the award, the procedural omission did not warrant invalidation.
The court held that Rule 1.611 does not mechanically invalidate modification orders upon the sole ground that the application lacked an accompanying financial statement, particularly when the evidence is competent and substantial in support of the award and the appellant demonstrates no prejudice from the omission.
[1] A petition for modification of child support is not automatically invalidated by the failure to attach a financial affidavit when competent and substantial evidence suppo…
[2] The failure to attach a financial affidavit to a petition for modification of child support does not require reversal of the modification order absent a showing of prejud…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“We do not think the court in Wilson intended to mechanically invalidate all orders granting awards contemplated under Rule 1.611 upon the sole reason that applications for such awards were not accompanied by financial statements, when the evidence is competent and substantial in support of the awards.”
Establishes the court's rejection of a strict mechanical rule requiring dismissal for procedural non-compliance
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRonald and Patricia Nour were involved in a child support dispute. Patricia sought modification of the existing child support award. Her petition for …
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 Prejudice From Procedural Error cases and more on FLexlaw
ERVIN, Judge.
We find the evidence competent and substantial in support of the trial court’s order modifying the child support award in favor of appellee wife, and it is affirmed. Because of plaintiff’s reliance on Wilson v. Wilson, 351 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), and its requirement that an application for a modification of child support be accompanied by a financial affidavit, we address the first point alleging the lower court erred in refusing to dismiss the wife’s petition for modification of child support since the petition did not have attached to it, as required by Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.611, a financial affidavit. Rule 1.611 does not specifically address the question of what consequences follow when a party fails to attach a financial statement to a support petition.
Wilson reversed an order awarding temporary alimony since the application was neither accompanied by a financial statement nor supported by competent substantial evidence. We do not think the court in Wilson intended to mechanically invalidate all orders granting awards contemplated under Rule 1.611 upon the sole reason that applications for such awards were not accompanied by financial statements, when the evidence is competent and substantial in support of the awards. Appellant makes no argument that he was prejudiced by not being furnished with the statement. Indeed, for at least one year following the marital dissolution, appellant’s income increased substantially, although it later decreased. In the absence of a showing that appellant was prejudiced by not being furnished prior to the hearing the financial statement, when the petition for modification generally alleged changes in circumstances, we refuse to invalidate the order granting the petition for modification and increasing the support award. The order of modification is affirmed.
McCORD, Acting C. J., and LARRY G. SMITH, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vaccaro v. Vaccaro, 677 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…So. 2d 19 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). The appellant must demonstrate that he was prejudiced by the other party’s failure to file the affidavit and that the award is not supported by competent substantial evidence. Seinfeld v. Seinfeld, supra; Nour v. Nour, 373 So. 2d 379 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). To establish prejudice, the appellant must demonstrate that the court would not have awarded the monetary relief had it possessed the information required by the financial affidavit. Seinfeld v. Seinfeld, supra. Assuming Peter…
Authorities Cited
- Wilson v. Wilson, 351 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)