MARTHA JANE LEONARD, APPELLANT,
v.
THOMAS JAMES LEONARD, 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 court held that the trial judge abused discretion by failing to hear the appellant when she arrived shortly after the scheduled hearing time.
Appellant wife filed a motion for contempt alleging $12,000 in child support arrearages. She arrived at the courthouse three minutes after the schedul…
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 Motion For Contempt cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant/wife appeals from the lower court’s order awarding only $1,390.00 in ar-rearages for child support when she had filed a motion for contempt alleging arrear-ages of $12,000.00.
On May 28,1980, a motion for an order of contempt along with a supplemental complaint for modification to increase child support was filed. A hearing on appellant’s motion was scheduled for June 17, 1980, at 11:00 a. m.
She drove from Port St. Lucie, her home, to St. Petersburg for the hearing; a distance of 175 miles. Appellant went to the office of her attorney so that he could direct her to the courthouse. Appellant-and her attorney arrived at the courthouse no more than three minutes after 11:00 a. m. Appellee and his attorney were leaving the courtroom and appellant’s attorney was informed by the trial judge that the hearing had been held at the scheduled time. Ap-pellee had been present with his attorney and apparently based solely upon appellee’s testimony, the trial judge ordered him to pay the amount of $1,390.00.-
While the trial court’s order might be sustainable as based upon the only evidence before him, we feel his failure to hear the appellant was an abuse of discretion. Ellard v. Godwin, 77 So. 2d 617 (Fla.1955). We, therefore, reverse and remand for a full evidentiary hearing as to the amount of arrearages in child support.
SCHEB, C. J., and OTT and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ahmed M. Elmariah v. Assocs. Fin. Servs. Corp., 401 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)…or not appellant or his attorney had actual notice of the final hearing. We reverse. The question of whether or not notice was received by the appellant or his attorney is of sufficient import to justify an evidentiary hearing. Leonard v. Leonard, 397 So. 2d 425 (Fla.2d DCA 1981). Thus, the trial judge abused his discretion in summarily denying the motion for rehearing. We note, however, that a better procedure was available to the appellant for relief from the final judgment order pursuant to Florida Rule…
Authorities Cited
- Beulah M. Ellard v. Godwin, 77 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1955)