SALVADOR LANDA, APPELLANT,
v.
GABRIELA MASSIE, 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.
Salvador Landa appealed a trial court order increasing his child support obligation from $510 to $931.70 per month. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court failed to demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances required to modify the parties' child support agreement, and reinstated the agreed-upon amount of $510 per month.
The court reversed the modification order, holding that the trial court failed to demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances required to justify modifying an agreed-upon child support obligation. The court reinstated the parties' agreement of $510 per month because there was no evidence that the children's needs had increased or that the husband's income had increased since the last child support order.
[1] Modification of child support requires proof of a substantial, significant, material, involuntary, and permanent change in circumstances.
[2] A party seeking modification of child support bears the burden of proving a change in circumstances.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“a prerequisite for modification of child support is that the petitioner prove that there has been a substantial change in circumstances... This change in circumstances must be significant, material, involuntary, and permanent in nature.”
Establishes the legal standard required for modifying child support obligations in Florida.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLanda and Massie divorced in February 1988 with child support set at $500 per month for their two minor children. When Massie moved to Chile, child su…
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 Burden Of Proof For Modification cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Salvador Landa challenges that part of the trial court’s order of May 2, 1991 which grants his former spouse, Gabriela Massie, an increase in child support payments. We reverse the order as to those payments.
In February 1988, Landa and Massie were divorced. By agreement, child support for the couple’s two minor children was set at $500 per month. Eight months later, Massie and the two children relocated to Chile. Thereafter, child support was ordered reduced to $300 per month, in part to compensate for the cost of Landa visiting the children in Chile. Some months later, Massie returned to Dade County with the children and sought an increase in child support. At a January 3, 1990 hearing on the child support issue and other matters, both sides’ attorneys announced to the court that the couple had agreed to child support of $510 per month, but other concerns, including visitation, were still unsettled.
Thereafter, Massie filed a motion for the enforcement of child support. At the same time, Landa filed a motion seeking custody of the children. Six months later, the trial court issued an order denying the custody change and ordering child support of $500 per month with no retroactivity. Massie then moved for reconsideration arguing that Florida’s child support guidelines called for support of $1,265 per month. Landa argued the $510 settlement figure announced at the January hearing constituted a permanent agreement as to the child support due. The trial court, on reconsideration, ordered that Landa’s support obligation in light of the guidelines was $931.70 per month and that payment of that amount was to be retroactive to the January hearing date.
This court has held that a prerequisite for modification of child support is that the petitioner prove that there has been a substantial change in circumstances. Hale v. Hale, 567 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), including the financial circumstances of one or both parties. Fritz v. Fritz, 485 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Brown v. Brown, 315 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). This change in circumstances must be significant, material, involuntary, and permanent in nature. In re Marriage of Johnson, 352 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). The party seeking modification has the burden of showing this change in circumstances. Meltzer v. Meltzer, 356 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 370 So. 2d 460 (Fla.1979). Where, as here, the amount of child support is based upon an agreement by the parties, a heavier burden rests upon the party seeking a modification than would otherwise be required. See Tietig v. Boggs, 578 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
In the instant case, the evidence demonstrated a support agreement had been entered into by the parties at the time of dissolution, and reinstated, by agreement, with the addition of $10 per month for medical expenses, upon Massie’s return to this country. The evidence failed to show that the children’s needs had increased since the date of the last child support order. Likewise, there was no proof of an increase in the husband’s income at that time. Thus, while the court had the authority to modify the agreement, O’Brien v. O’Brien, 424 So. 2d 970, 971 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (right to receive support belongs to child and may not be waived by parent), circumstances mandating modification were not demonstrated.
Accordingly, we reverse the support order under review. The case is remanded with instructions that the agreement entered into by the parties ordering child support set at $510 monthly should be put into effect, and retroactive payments due the wife should reflect this monthly obligation.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Alvarez, 629 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…o pay the child support arrearage. Of course, the father may return to the trial court to seek modification of its child support order upon a showing of a substantial change in financial circumstances on the part of the mother. See Landa v. Massie, 593 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 602 So. 2d 942 (Fla.1992). Affirmed.…
-
Whitney v. Drue Leslye Whitney, 624 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…art[y]_” § 61.14(1), Fla.Stat. (1991). A review of Mr. Whitney’s complete financial picture demonstrates that he has not carried his heavy burden of showing a permanent, involuntary, significant and material change in circumstances. Landa v. Massie, 593 So. 2d 1146, 1147 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 602 So. 2d 942 (Fla.1992). See Tietig v. Boggs, 602 So. 2d 1250, 1251 (Fla.1992). The husband’s base salary reduction did not foreclose his ability to pay the agreed child support. Mr. Whitney testified that he h…
-
State v. Alonso, 626 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…PER CURIAM. The downward modification of the father’s child support obligation is reversed because there was no showing of any change in the pertinent circumstances. Landa v. Massie, 593 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), review denied, 602 So. 2d 942 (Fla.1992).1 No abuse of discretion has been demonstrated in the determination of the amount the appellee is required to pay toward his support arrearag-es. See Ashe v. Ashe, 509 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 1s…
Authorities Cited
- Meltzer v. Meltzer, 356 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Brown v. Brown, 315 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- O'Brien v. O'Brien, 424 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- In re the Marriage OF James M. Johnson, 352 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Tietig v. Boggs, 578 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Hicks v. State, 485 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Aleyda Fritz v. Fritz, 485 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Hale v. Hale, 567 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)