DEBORAH LYNNE FILEGER, FORMER WIFE, APPELLANT,
v.
LANCE ALLEN FILEGER, FORMER HUSBAND, BLAIR FILEGER AND ANNA MARIE FILEGER, AS GRANDPARENTS, APPELLEES
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.
A dissenting judge argued that the alimony and child support awards were excessive given the husband's projected income and the financial state of his corporation.
The dissenting judge believed the alimony and child support awards were excessive and an error, although they agreed the wife should pay her own attorney's fees.
The former husband appealed a dissolution decree. The dissenting judge noted the husband's income was projected at $66,000 annually, while the alimony…
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 Compelling Circumstances cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order which changed custody of a minor child from the appellant/mother to the paternal grandparents. The order also terminated future child support payments due appellant from the appellee/former husband, and vacated arrearages for past due child support. Appellant appeals only that part of the trial court’s order that vacated arrearages of past due child support. We reverse.
Past due child support payments constitute vested property rights which are not subject to modification absent compelling circumstances or valid defense. Raybuck v. Raybuck, 451 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). While it has been made to appear that the minor child in this case was actually in the custody of the paternal grandparents during part of the time that the ar-rearages accrued, that, in itself, is not a sufficient compelling circumstance or valid defense such as to justify vacating the arrearages. Raybuck; Martinez v. Martinez, 383 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Accordingly, the trial court erred in vacating any arrearages due between February 1, 1982, and August 13, 1984.
The provision of the order of the trial court that vacated arrearages of child support is reversed.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hammond v. Hammond, 492 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)…f the remaining minor child, modification of the award was error. Past due installments of child support constitute vested property rights which are not subject to modification absent compelling circumstances or a valid defense. Fileger v. Fileger, 478 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Thomas, 477 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Teta v. Teta, 297 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). The fact that one child has reached majority is not a sufficient compelling circumstanc…
-
Wooten v. Wooten, 510 So. 2d 1033 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…parently conclude that under the present state of the record, there is no showing of compelling equitable considerations entitling husband to such a set-off, and the trial court’s order allowing such a set-off should be reversed. Fileger v. Fileger, 478 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); cf. Raybuck v. Raybuck, 451 So. 2d 540, 541-542 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) [“Absent compelling circumstances or a valid defense, a trial court lacks the authority to retrospectively cancel or reduce past due child support payments.”]. Th…
-
Harris v. Harris, 512 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…rder a nullity. We do not ignore the settled rule that arrearages of child support are vested and not subject to retrospective modification absent compelling circumstances. Hammond v. Hammond, 492 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Fileger v. Fileger, 478 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Thomas, 477 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So. 2d 829 (Fla.1986); Teta v. Teta, 297 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). We would only note that a court that enter…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sherl Lanette Raybuck v. Raybuck, 451 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Martinez v. Martinez, 383 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)