WAYNE S. HENDERSON, APPELLANT,
v.
NADINE S. HENDERSON, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Petition For Modification Of Child Support cases and more on FLexlaw
FARMER, Judge.
The former husband appeals an order granting his former wife’s petition for modification of child support. The petition had followed close on the heels of a previous such application. Eleven months earlier, the court had denied a similar petition for modification, finding no significant change in the circumstances of the parties. We reverse.
Although there was some evidence at the hearing on the later petition showing an increased need, that finding alone will not support a petition for modification; there must also be evidence of an ability to pay the increase sought before modification is appropriate. This case is indistinguishable from Douglass v. Rigg, 525 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 4th DCA1988), where we reversed an increase that lacked evidence of the payor’s ability to shoulder the increase sought. See also Huff v. Huff, 556 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 4th DCA1990). Here, there was no evidence of any ability to pay any increase in child support.
We therefore reverse the trial court’s decision and remand with directions to enter an order denying former wife’s petition for modification.
REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.
GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and WARNER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Arriaga v. State, 666 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…nce form, the trial court wrote the words “no early termination” in the blank space for additional conditions of the probation imposed. The state concedes that it was error for the trial court to impose this special condition, citing Baker v. State, 619 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). That case concerned a probation condition providing that the Department of Corrections could not recommend an early termination. The second district held that a trial judge does not have the power to prevent a future court from d…1 / 2
-
Jones v. State, 666 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…completion of a sex offender program, it appears calculated to divest the Department of Corrections of its authority to recommend early termination of probation. § 948.04(3), Fla.Stat. (1998). This is impermissible, and, as stated in Baker v. State, 619 So. 2d 411, 412 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993), “a trial judge is not empowered to prevent the circuit court in the future from exercising its authority to discharge a probationer. § 948.05, Fla.Stat. (1991).” Thus, probation condition 33 must be stricken. Of the $288.0…
-
Swedish v. State, 724 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…e conclude that the trial court erred by imposing a special condition of probation which attempts to prevent the Department of Corrections (DOC) from exercising its authority to recommend early termination of Swedish’s probation. See Baker v. State, 619 So. 2d 411, 411 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Therefore, we strike that special condition and direct the trial court, upon remand, to correct the judgment so that the DOC is made aware that the special condition no longer exists. Affirmed and remanded with directions…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Anderson Brooks v. State, 556 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Huff v. Norilyn K. Huff, 556 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Stephen Chaz, Inc. v. The Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States, 525 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)