MATT WEINSTEIN, APPELLANT,
v.
FRANCINE R. STEELE, 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.
Weinstein appealed a child support modification order where the trial court awarded support below the statutory guideline amount for parents earning over $50,000 annually. The court vacated and remanded, holding that statutory child support guidelines must serve as a floor for awards above the income threshold, and that any departure requires findings of fact.
Child support guidelines presumptively establish the required award amount and must serve as a floor for awards in cases where parental income exceeds $50,000. Trial courts may depart below the guideline floor only upon findings of specific circumstances justifying the departure; absent such findings, an award below the guidelines constitutes an abuse of discretion.
[1] A trial court has discretion to determine the retroactive date for a child support modification order.
[2] A trial court abuses its discretion by failing to award child support at least at the minimum amount required by statutory guidelines when the parties' combined income ex…
Previewing 2 of 4 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 child support guideline amount as determined by [section 61.30] presumptively establishes the amount the trier of fact shall order as child support”
Establishes that statutory guidelines create a presumption controlling child support awards
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWeinstein petitioned for modification of a dissolution judgment, seeking custody and modified child support for three sons. The trial court awarded We…
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 Child Support Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
BASKIN, Judge.
Matt Weinstein appeals an order modifying an award of child support. We vacate the modified award and remand.
Weinstein petitioned the trial court for modification of a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, requesting custody of the parties’ three sons and modification of child support. The court awarded Weinstein custody of the three sons. The trial court determined that the parents’ income exceeded $50,000 annually, and, therefore, the child support guidelines in section 61.-30, Florida Statutes (1989), did not apply. The court decided that the sons’ support needs were $490.26 per month, per child, a total of $1,470.80 monthly for the three sons, and ordered the mother to pay $245.14 per month, per child until they reach majority. The oldest son reached majority within two months of the order. At that point the support award fell to $980.52 a month for the two minor sons.
Weinstein appeals the order, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding child support for the two minor sons below the amount suggested by the presumptive child support guidelines for two children when the parents’ income is below $50,000. We agree. “The child support guideline amount as determined by [section 61.30] presumptively establishes the amount the trier of fact shall order as child support_” § 61.30(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1989). Although these guidelines do not apply to parents with an annual income in excess of $50,000 per year, § 61.30(l)(b)2, Fla.Stat. (1989),1 other courts have determined that the guidelines are an appropriate starting point for the calculation of child-support awards.
In Hinshelwood v. Hinshelwood, 564 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), Judge Sharp, specially concurring, stated that it was unfair and inequitable to award child support in an amount below that established by the guidelines for parents who earn up to $50,000. That reasoning was adopted by the First District Court of Appeal in Harrison v. Harrison, 573 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), where the court directed the trial court to “use the maximum presumptive guidelines amount as a ‘floor’ to the child support award....” Harrison, 573 So. 2d at 1020. We agree that the guidelines should be utilized as a floor in the consideration of the sums to be awarded for child support in cases where the parents’ income exceeds $50,000 annually. Hinshelwood, (Sharp, J., specially concurring).
There may, however, be circumstances, such as the ones presented here, that lead the trial court to impose an award below that guideline sum. In those cases, the trial court will greatly aid appellate review by providing reasons for its award. Absent some basis for a departure from the guidelines, such an award is an abuse of discretion. We therefore vacate the child support award and remand the case for findings.
On remand, the trial court is also directed to enter findings as to why the father’s request that the support award be retroactive to the date of his petition should not be granted. See Waldman v. Waldman, 520 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 531 So. 2d 169 (Fla.1988); Shufflebarger v. Shufflebarger, 460 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).
Vacated and remanded.
. Section 61.30 has been amended to apply to parents who have a combined net annual income not exceeding $100,800. Ch. 91-246, § 5, Laws of Fla.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sinclair v. Sinclair, 594 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…t provided $1,600 as child support for the two children. That amount fell to $800 in December 1991, when the daughter attained the age of majority. The trial court did not have the benefit of this court’s recent pronouncement in Weinstein v. Steele, 590 So. 2d 1005, 1006 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), where we held that “the guidelines should be utilized as a floor in the consideration of the sums to be awarded for child support_” The $800 awarded is considerably below the guideline amount of $1,148, appropriate for one…
-
Dienstag v. Dienstag, 596 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla.1985); Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Weinstein v. Steele, 590 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Bergstrom v. Bergstrom, 559 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 574 So. 2d 139 (Fla.1990); Gustafson v. Jensen, 515 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); O’Neal v. O’Neal, 410 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).…
-
Torres v. Hunter, 592 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…00 maximum provided in section 61.30, a trial court should nevertheless “use the maximum presumptive guidelines amount as a ‘floor’ to the child support award....” See also Barrs v. Barrs, 590 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), and Weinstein v. Steele, 590 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Although we agree that the former wife’s evidence failed to adequately address the child’s needs, we do not find in the record evidence establishing that her needs are less than the minimum guidelines amount for parties earning…
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
- Waldman v. Waldman, 520 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Shufflebarger v. Harry L. Shufflebarger, M.D., 460 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Yola Harrison v. Harrison, 573 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Hinshelwood v. Hinshelwood, 564 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)