DOROTHY MASSEY, APPELLANT,
v.
CLEVELAND MASSEY, 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 mother has standing to enforce child support payments that accrued after the children turned eighteen, even under a pre-1973 award.
The trial court initially awarded the mother $1,150 for child support arrearages but later set it aside, following a precedent that she lacked standin…
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 Arrearages cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
After rendering a $1,150 judgment in the mother’s favor for arrearages on a 1966 child support order entered in an Alabama-initiated Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act proceeding, the trial court granted rehearing and set it aside because the payments in question had accrued after the children turned eighteen. In doing so, it followed Cronebaugh v. Van Dyke, 415 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), which holds that the mother lacks standing to recover those amounts, even under a pre-1973 award like this one which requires the father to make child support payments until twenty-one.1 The wife appeals.
The extensive discussions contained in the three opinions in Cronebaugh make repetition unnecessary and meaningful addition impossible. We prefer and adopt the dissenting opinion of Judge Sharp in Cronebaugh, at 415 So. 2d 743, as the appropriate resolution of the present issue2 and therefore reverse the order under review and remand the cause with directions to reinstate the initial $1,150 judgment against the appellee.
Reversed.
. While, unlike Cronebaugh, direct payments to the children were not involved here, that fact does not affect, see Clemons v. Flagler Hospital, Inc., 385 So. 2d 1134, 1136, n. 3 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), the alternative holding of the majority on the standing issue which was followed by the trial court but with which we disagree.
. We concur with Judge Sharp that, in every such instance, the mother has the right to en-ióme a "limbo" support order between ages eighteen and twenty-one; we would point out, moreover, that the evanescent nature of the supposed alternative remedy for enforcement— that is, an action by the children themselves — is emphasized in the present context by the dubiousness of the ability of adult children even to maintain an action under the URESA.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Holland, 602 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…itative Services on behalf of Bachtal v. Bachtal, 517 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Brown v. Brown, 484 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Newman v. Newman, 459 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), rev. denied, 466 So. 2d 218 (Fla.1985); Massey v. Massey, 443 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Holmes v. Holmes, 384 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). The First District has also rejected Cronebaugh in a case where the child support obligation was created by a marital settlement agreement rather than a dissolution decree. S…
-
Shufflebarger v. Harry L. Shufflebarger, M.D., 460 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…ight to support while the children were minors. We believe they are entitled to enforce the payments of child support which accrued before the children reached age eighteen. See Newman v. Newman, 459 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Massey v. Massey, 443 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Cronebaugh v. Van Dyke, 415 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) (Sharp, J„ dissenting), pet. for rev. denied, 426 So. 2d 25 (Fla.1983). Accordingly, the order of the trial court under review is affirmed in part and reversed in part a…
-
Pyne v. Black, 650 So. 2d 1073 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…mer wife to enforce arrearage for accrued college expenses provided for in final judgment and settlement agreement incorporated therein); Newman v. Newman, 459 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), rev. denied, 466 So. 2d 218 (Fla.1985), Massey v. Massey, 443 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (adopting the dissenting opinion in Cronebaugh v. Van Dyke, as that court's ruling) Holmes v. Holmes, 384 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980) (allowed former wife to enforce settlement agreement incorporated in final judgment of dissol…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Cronebaugh v. van Dyke, 415 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Clemons v. Flagler Hosp., Inc., 385 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)