ROBERT JAMES LITTS, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Waldman v. Waldman, 612 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
  …tances where that party can show “compelling equitable criteria and considerations” justifying such set off. Chappell v. Chappell, 253 So. 2d 281, 287 (Fla. 4th DCA1971); Francisco v. Francisco, 505 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 2d DCA1987); Glaeser v. Glaeser, 449 So. 2d 428, 430 (Fla. 2d DCA1984). As stated in Chappell, “child support ... is not an ‘ordi [*705] nary debt’ but rather a court-imposed obligation to provide for one’s child.” 253 So. 2d at 287 (quoting Williams v. Williams, 8 Cal.App.3d 636, 87 Cal.Rptr. 75…
• Servies v. Servies, 524 So. 2d 678 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
  …fs against alimony payments are generally frowned upon and will not be permitted “in the absence of compelling equitable criteria and considerations to the contrary.” Chappell v. Chappell, 253 So. 2d 281, 287 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); Glaeser v. Glaeser, 449 So. 2d 428, 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). No such compelling equitable criteria are present in the instant case. It appears from the record that husband made the extra payments voluntarily, that there was no agreement between the parties to the effect that the overp…
• Baker v. Baker, 920 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
  …n the mother’s action to collect unpaid alimony and child support. Yet the supreme court affirmed a finding that laches did not apply because the record contained no evidence that the delay adversely affected the father. See also Glaeser v. Glaeser, 449 So. 2d 428, 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (concluding that laches did not apply when “[t]he husband did not establish any injury or prejudice caused by the delay”). In this case, Susan failed to offer any evidence of prejudice resulting from Raymond’s delay. She sho…

Authorities Cited

• Christopher v. State, 416 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1982)