MICHAEL LANDIS, APPELLANT,
v.
ANDREA LANDIS, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1986-04-01
No. 85-2004
Before HENDRY, HUBBART and FERGUSON, JJ.
486 So. 2d 28 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1986) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Topics
Child Support Modification Competent Substantial Evidence Abuse Of Discretion

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Child Support Modification cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
HENDRY, Judge.

HENDRY, Judge.

Appellant Michael Landis appeals from a final order of the trial court adopting the findings and recommendations of the general master on the issue of a modification of appellant’s child support obligations. We affirm the final order upon the holding that there was substantial competent evidence to support the general master’s findings that the child’s needs had increased greatly in the ten years since the final order of dissolution had been entered and that appellant had the ability to pay increased child support. A trial court is bound by a master’s factual findings when they are supported by competent evidence. Dent v. Dent, 438 So. 2d 903 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), rev. dismissed, 461 So. 2d 114 (Fla.1984).

Furthermore, given that, first, the evidence showed that the basic monthly expenses for the now 13 year old child exceeded the current child support payment; second, appellant’s income had more than tripled during the ten year period; and third, appellant agreed that an increase was appropriate, it would have been an abuse of discretion for the trial court to refuse an increase. Smith v. Smith, 474 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).

All other points on appeal are without merit.

Affirmed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • de Clements v. de Clements, 662 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
    …an, 88 So. 2d 545 (Fla.1956); Kersh v. Kersh, 613 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Reali v. Velocci, 563 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d 294 (Fla.1991); Reece v. Reece, 449 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Landis v. Landis, 486 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Ben-Hain, 418 So. 2d at 1108; Sitomer v. Sitomer, 397 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Hemminger v. Hemminger, 391 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980), review denied, 399 So. 2d 1143 (Fla.1981). Additionally, and in complement to the a…
  • Lelani Barrow v. Barrow, 563 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
    …f a master should be approved and adopted by a trial judge unless clearly erroneous, or it appears that the master has misconceived the legal effect of the evidence.” Bloom v. Bloom, 414 So. 2d 1153, 1155 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Landis v. [*220] Landis, 486 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Linn v. Linn, 523 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 534 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 1988); Sitomer v. Sitomer, 397 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). The record does not reveal any error in the master’s fact findings; accordingly, the…
  • Millard B. Wright v. Wright, 516 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
    …PER CURIAM. We affirm the trial court’s order finding that the report of the general master is supported by competent evidence. See Landis v. Landis, 486 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (“A trial court is bound by a master’s factual findings when they are supported by competent evidence.”); Shaw v. Shaw, 369 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (trial court must uphold master’s findings unless report was clearly erroneou…

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw