CARRIE L. BUCK
v.
KERRY BUCK
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 appellate court affirmed most of a lower court's judgment regarding alimony and child support but reversed the child support calculations. The court found the lower court's income figures and deductions lacked competent, substantial evidence in the record, making it impossible to determine the basis for the calculations.
Yes, the trial court erred because the record lacked competent, substantial evidence to support the income figures and deductions used in the child support calculations. Therefore, the child support calculations must be reversed and recalculated.
[1] A trial court's child support calculations must be supported by competent, substantial evidence in the record showing the basis for income determinations and the mathemat…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“But as the Former Wife points out, it is impossible to determine from the record how the court arrived at the income figures or deductions it utilized, or what calculations it used to reach those figures.”
This quote establishes the core factual and legal problem identified by the appellate court regarding the lack of record support for the trial court's calculations.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Former Wife appealed an amended final judgment modifying alimony and child support. The judgment included child support calculations based on spec…
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 Supplemental Petition For Modification Of Child Support cases and more on FLexlaw
LUCAS, Judge. Carrie L. Buck (the Former Wife) appeals the "Amended Final Judgment on Former Husband's Supplemental Petition for Modification of Alimony and Child Support" entered on July 3, 2019. We find no merit in the Former Wife's arguments and affirm the judgment below in all respects save one. The amended final judgment included findings as to the parties' respective gross and net incomes, as well as deductions to those incomes, from which the court computed a modified child support
obligation for Kerry Buck (the Former Husband).
But as the Former Wife points out, it is impossible to determine from the record how the court arrived at the income figures or deductions it utilized, or what calculations it used to reach those figures. Without competent, substantial evidence to support the court's income findings, we are compelled to reverse the court's judgment with respect to those calculations. See C.J.I.-R. v. C.M., 215 So. 3d 198, 198 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (citing Hoffman v. Hoffman, 98 So. 3d 196, 197 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); McCants v. McCants, 984 So. 2d 678, 682 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)).1 KHOUZAM, C.J., and STARGEL, J., Concur. 1The Former Husband posits some possible mathematical calculations the circuit court may have used, which, he argues, would approximate the income and deductions figures in the amended final judgment. The difficulty with accepting the Former Husband's argument is that it would be completely speculative on our part to assume that the circuit court contemplated any of his proffered calculations when none of them were ever discussed, much less accepted. See Butler v. Yusem, 44 So. 3d 102, 105 (Fla. 2010) ("Under the tipsy coachman doctrine, where the trial court 'reaches the right result, but for the wrong reasons,' an appellate court can affirm the decision only if 'there is any theory or principle of law in the record which would support the ruling.' " (quoting Robertson v. State, 829 So. 2d 901, 906 (Fla. 2002))).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Swett v. State, 829 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 2002)
- Windom v. State, 984 So. 2d 678 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
- Hoffman v. Melodie Joy Hoffman, 98 So. 3d 196 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)
- C.J.I.-R. v. C.M., 215 So. 3d 198 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)