BETTY A. MEARS AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLANTS,
v.
LARRY M. LUTERMAN, APPELLEEQ
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 Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services appealed a trial court order that withheld ruling on a child support petition against the father until a simultaneous petition was also filed against the mother. The appellate court reversed, holding that the statute requires the department to file support actions against any parent with reasonable ability to pay, but does not mandate simultaneous or parallel filings against both parents.
The court held that section 409.2564(1), Florida Statutes requires the department to institute an action for support against any person liable for the child's support once a reasonable ability to pay has been determined, but does not require that petitions against both parents be filed or withheld simultaneously. The department may proceed against one parent even if no petition has yet been filed against the other.
[1] A statute requiring the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services to institute an action for child support against a responsible parent upon determination of their…
[2] The legislative intent of child support statutes is to ensure children are maintained from the resources of responsible parents, thereby relieving the burden on public as…
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“In each case in which regular child support payments are not being made to the department as provided herein, the department shall institute, within 30 days after determination of the responsible parent's reasonable ability to pay, an action for support against any person liable for the support of the child.”
The statutory language that controls the case, showing the department's mandatory duty to file support actions against liable parents once ability to pay is determined.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBetty A. Mears, a custodial grandmother, and the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services sought child support from Larry Luterman, the child'…
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 Petition For Support cases and more on FLexlaw
HENDRY, Judge.
The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services and Betty A. Mears, custodial grandmother of the child receiving Aid for Dependent Children funds, appeal from an order of the trial court withholding a ruling on their petition for support which had been filed against respondent Larry Luterman, the child’s natural father. After a hearing, the trial court entered an order directing that no action be taken against respondent father until a petition for support was filed against the natural mother also and both cases brought before the court at the same time. We reverse on the basis of the plain language of section 409.2564(1), Florida Statutes (1983), which states in relevant part:
In each case in which regular child support payments are not being made to the department as provided herein, the department shall institute, within 30 days after determination of the responsible parent’s reasonable ability to pay, an action for support against any person liable for the support of the child.
The statute makes clear that the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services must file a petition for support against at least one parent (or possibly both), as long as there has been a determination that there is a reasonable ability to pay. The statute does not require that when both parents appear to be in a position to pay child support that petitions against both parents must be filed or filed against neither at all. To read such a requirement into the statute would thwart the legislative intent, which is clearly expressed in section 409.2551: It is declared to be the public policy of this state that this act be construed and administered to the end that children shall be maintained from the resources of responsible parents, thereby relieving, at least in part, the burden presently borne by the general citizenry through public assistance programs.
The department determined that respondent had a reasonable ability to pay $25.00 a week toward the support of his child; it is free to find that the mother has a reasonable ability to pay some amount also. Until it does so, however, the department is not foreclosed from asking that respondent pay his share of the child’s expenses.
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Camps v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 459 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…409.2561(1), Florida Statutes, and the basic legal obligation there recognized can be the basis for many, recurring separate actions as the essential operative facts occur or unfold. See section 409.-2564(1), Florida Statutes, and Mears v. Luterman, 453 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Each of the two causes of action involved in this case is separate and distinct from the other because each has a different real [*1144] party in interest2 and each requires proof of facts not required by the other. There was no…