WENDY LYN ABOLSKY, APPELLANT,
v.
STUART D. ABOLSKY, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed a child-support award because the trial court merely memorialized the father's existing obligation as a tenant in common to pay half the mortgage without imposing any further child-support obligation.
A child-support award that merely requires payment of the obligor's share of the marital home mortgage as a cotenant, without additional child-support payments, is inadequate and must be reversed.
[1] A child-support award that merely requires payment of the obligor's proportionate share of the marital home mortgage as a cotenant, without additional child-support payme…
[2] An order requiring maintenance of an existing life insurance policy may be properly imposed as security for payment of child support.
Previewing 2 of 2 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“the award merely memorialized the father's already existing obligation as a tenant in common to pay half the mortgage, and failed to impose any further obligation upon him”
The court's explanation of why the child-support award was inadequate
In a divorce proceeding, the trial court ordered the father to pay half the mortgage on the marital home as his obligation as a tenant in common, and …
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 Life Insurance As Security cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Finding that the trial court failed to provide an appropriate child-support award, we reverse and remand. Under the final judgment, the award merely memorialized the father’s already existing obligation as a tenant in common to pay half the mortgage, and failed to impose any further obligation upon him. Cf. Gudinas v. Gudinas, 471 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (one-half of ordered payment of entire mortgage on marital home properly considered required payment as cotenant; other half considered child support). Compare Pastore v. Pastore, 497 So. 2d 635 (Fla.1986) (order directing payment of entire mortgage on marital residence as “unallocated child support and alimony,” as well as awarding $375 per month per child for child support, not error); Putman v. Putman, 154 So. 2d 717 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963) (order directing payment of entire mortgage on marital residence and $150 per month as child support, as well as all extraordinary medical and dental expenses, and maintenance of health insurance for child, not error).
The trial court did not err in ordering the father to maintain his existing life insurance policy for the benefit of the child. Maintenance of an existing life insurance policy may be ordered as security for the payment of child support. See Bosem v. Bosem, 279 So. 2d 863 (Fla.1973).
Finding the award of child support to be inadequate, we reverse with directions to the trial court to provide appropriate child support.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Howell v. State, 877 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 2004)…t asserts nonetheless that had trial counsel introduced the evidence and requested an instruction thereon, the jury might have returned a verdict other than guilty of first-degree murder. In support of this contention, Howell cites State v. Rushing, 532 So. 2d 1338 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988), in which the court reversed the dismissal of an information charging manslaughter by culpable negligence based on the defendant’s act of giving a loaded gun to the suicidal victim. The court concluded in Rushing that because “-a…
-
Glover v. Glover, 601 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…1st DCA 1987). Although the decision whether to require Husband to maintain a life insurance policy listing the four children as beneficiaries is discretionary with the trial court, see Bosem v. Bosem, 279 So. 2d 863 (Fla.1973); Abolsky v. Abolsky, 532 So. 2d 1338 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), the failure to address and determine the life insurance issue raised at trial by Wife’s pleadings and testimony is an error of omission, and the issue of life insurance must be considered as part of the overall equitable distribu…
-
Jeramy James Rickey Rushing v. State, 568 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…ening suicide, removed a pistol from his automobile and loaded it in front of the victim. The victim then received or took the gun from the defendant and shot herself. This court has previously addressed the merits of the charge in State v. Rushing, 532 So. 2d 1338 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). Appellant requested the following abbreviated excusable homicide instruction: The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, when commit [*1280] ted by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawfu…
Authorities Cited
- Bosem v. Arie Lionel Bosem, 279 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 1973)
- Pastore v. Pastore, 497 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 1986)
- Putman v. Putman, 154 So. 2d 717 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Gudinas v. Eugenia Wanda Gudinas, 471 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)