INDUSTRIAL FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,

v.

SYBIL WILLIAMS AND JANIE TAYLOR, APPELLEES

Citator

Cited By

• Sherl Lanette Raybuck v. Raybuck, 451 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
  …ent is not entitled to reimbursement for child support payments made while the child is staying with the payor parent and while the other parent still has legal custody. Martinez v. Martinez, 383 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Cf. Tash v. Oesterle, 380 So. 2d 1316 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Patterson. As regards future due child support payments, the trial court erred in implicitly modifying the child support provision of the final divorce decree to mean that the father need not make child support payments while he…
• Carol Puglia & the Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Puglia, 600 So. 2d 484 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
  …s a narrow exception to this general rule: In the absence of some showing — which was not present here — that a payment to or on behalf of the child served to discharge a duty of support encompassed by the order in question, e.g., Tash v. Oesterle, 380 So. 2d 1316 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), and cases cited, such a payment, if unilaterally made without authority of court, cannot serve to discharge or reduce the requirements of the non-custodial parent. [Citations omitted]. Onley v. Onley, 540 So. 2d at 880, 881. App…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Patricia Onley & the Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Onley, 540 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
  …etrucci, 252 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). In the absence of some showing — which was not present here — that a payment to or on behalf of the child served to discharge a duty of support encompassed by the order in question, e.g., Tash v. Oesterle, 380 So. 2d 1316 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), and cases cited, [*881] such a payment, if unilaterally made without authority of court, cannot serve to discharge or reduce the requirements imposed upon the non-custodial parent. Ragan v. Thomas, 515 So. 2d at 405; Shufflebarge…

Authorities Cited

• Weathers v. Mission Ins. Co., 258 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
• Protective Nat'l Ins. Co. of Omaha v. McCALL, 310 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)