MICHAEL M. HORTON, APPELLANT,
v.
DONNA F. HORTON, 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.
The court held that a trial court erred in denying a party the opportunity to present evidence regarding ability to pay for temporary child support.
After a petition for dissolution was filed, the wife moved for temporary support. The trial court denied the husband's request to present evidence on …
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 Temporary Child Support cases and more on FLexlaw
BASKIN, Judge.
Michael Horton appeals an order granting his wife’s motion for temporary child support. We reverse.
After the husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage, the wife filed a motion for temporary support, requesting temporary alimony, child support, and attorney’s fees. At the hearing on the wife’s motion, the trial court denied the husband’s request to present evidence, postponing the taking of evidence until the final hearing. Consequently, the trial court entered its order awarding temporary child support without considering evidence concerning the needs of the parties and the husband’s ability to pay.1
In considering pendente lite awards “[t]he correct standard by which these amounts are to be assessed is ... the familiar one which balances needs as fixed by the parties’ standard of living, on the one hand, and ability to pay, on the other.” Vickers v. Vickers, 413 So. 2d 788, 789 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); see Belcher v. Belcher, 271 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1972). Because the trial court erred in denying the husband the opportunity to present testimony and evidence as to his ability to pay, Weasel v. Weasel, 421 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (temporary support award reversed because trial court did not allow wife to present testimony); see Herr v. Herr, 463 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) (temporary support award defective because trial court failed to make findings of child’s needs and husband’s ability to pay), we reverse the order granting temporary child support and remand for an evidentiary hearing.
Reversed and remanded.
. The order does not award other relief requested by the wife.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lane Mitzenmacher v. Mitzenmacher, 627 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…ial court was, accordingly, in error in rejecting the general master’s recommendation and in awarding temporary alimony which is clearly beyond the financial ability of the husband to pay. Mahan v. Mahan, 88 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1956); Horton v. Horton, 573 So. 2d 423 (Fla.3d DCA 1991); Fields v. Fields, 533 So. 2d 922 (Fla.2d DCA 1988); Herr v. Herr, 463 So. 2d 447 (Fla.4th DCA 1985); McAnespie v. McAnespie, 200 So. 2d 606 (Fla.2d DCA 1967). The order appealed from awarding temporary alimony is reversed and th…
-
Beverlie J. Miller v. Miller, 37 So. 3d 281 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)…ave been calculated had the figures on mother’s financial affidavit been used. As a general proposition, in the family law context a trial court errs if it fails to allow a party to offer evidence as to ability to pay. See, e.g., Horton v. Horton, 573 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Weasel v. Weasel, 421 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); see also Blews v. Blews, 812 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (concluding that the court erred by ruling on modification of alimony and child support after the parties’ opening…
Authorities Cited
- Annabelle G. Belcher v. Belcher, 271 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1972)
- Vickers v. Vickers, 413 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Weasel v. Weasel, 421 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Herr v. Herr, 463 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)