JANET FISHER, APPELLANT,
v.
LESTER FISHER, 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.
A Florida appellate court reversed a trial court's dismissal of a mother's action to enforce an Indiana child support judgment, holding that the father waived the statutory laches defense by failing to plead it properly and remanding for consideration of the father's equitable laches defense.
The court reversed, holding that the father waived the statutory laches defense by failing to plead it as required by Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. The court also held that while the trial court may consider equitable defenses, it must remand the case for the trial court to consider the father's equitable laches defense on the merits.
[1] A party waives the defense of statutory laches by failing to plead it as an affirmative defense.
[2] Florida courts must give full faith and credit to valid foreign judgments, including those establishing child support obligations.
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“It was error for the trial court to direct the verdict based on statutory laches because the father waived that defense. The affirmative defense of laches or statute of limitations must be pleaded.”
Establishes that statutory laches must be properly pleaded and failure to do so constitutes waiver.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe mother sought to enforce a December 1, 1967 Indiana judgment that dissolved the parties' marriage and obligated the father to pay child support. T…
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 Waiver Of Defenses cases and more on FLexlaw
PARKER, Judge.
Janet Fisher (the mother) appeals a final judgment entered against her in her action to enforce a foreign decree for child support. The trial court dismissed her complaint based on laches. We reverse, concluding that Lester Fisher (the father) waived the defense of statutory laches.
The mother filed this action to enforce a foreign judgment for child support, to domesticate the foreign judgment, for entry of a money judgment, and for other equitable relief to enforce the payment of child support. The final judgment sought to be enforced was an Indiana judgment dated December 1, 1967, dissolving the marriage of the parties and obligating the father to pay child support. The father asserted the affirmative defense of equitable laches. The case proceeded to a nonju-ry trial. After the mother rested her case, the father moved for a directed verdict on the basis that section 95.11(6), Florida Statutes (1989) required dismissal because the mother did not commence this action within five years of the date of the Indiana judgment.
The trial court took the motion for directed verdict under advisement. The father then testified, primarily to facts supporting his affirmative defense of equitable laches. Two months after the trial, the trial court granted the motion for directed verdict and entered a final judgment for the father. It was error for the trial court to direct the verdict based on statutory laches because the father waived that defense. The affirmative defense of laches or statute of limitations must be pleaded. Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.110(d). The father’s failure to plead statutory laches waived that defense. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.140(h).
Florida must give full faith and credit to the Indiana judgment which established the child support obligation. Florida may enforce the judgment as to past due child support payments even though the mother never obtained a judgment establishing arrears because those payments were vested. The reason that the payments are considered vested is because they could not be reduced retroactively in either Florida or Indiana. See Morin v. Morin, 466 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 2d DCA1985); Donegan v. Donegan, 586 N.E. 2d 844 (Ind.1992).
The trial court may consider equitable defenses. In this case the father pleaded and presented evidence pertaining to his defense of equitable laches. The trial court, having directed a verdict, did not rule on the defense. Thus, we remand this case to the trial court for its consideration of the father’s defense of equitable laches. Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
RYDER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Chapman, 638 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…ginally ordered to pay and erroneously made such decrease retroactive to the date of the original support order. We agree with the appellants and reverse. Since, pursuant to Morin v. Morin, 466 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), and Fisher v. Fisher, 613 So. 2d 1370 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993), child support awards cannot be retroactively reduced beyond the date of the filing of a petition for modification, we find the trial court erred in imposing such a reduction here. We also find the trial court failed to conduct a…
Authorities Cited
- Morin v. Morin, 466 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)