DOUGLAS B. MANN, HUSBAND, APPELLANT,
v.
CHERYL JANELL MANN, WIFE, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed awards of alimony, child support, and relocation permission, but reversed the requirement that the former husband maintain health insurance without a reasonableness limitation and struck an order restricting grandparent contact.
The trial court's awards of alimony, child support, and permission for relocation were affirmed, but the health insurance requirement was reversed to include a reasonableness limitation, and the grandparent contact restriction was struck.
[1] An order requiring a former spouse to maintain health insurance for children must be limited to situations where coverage is reasonably available at a reasonable rate.
[2] Trial court orders restricting children's contact with grandparents are improper absent specific statutory authority or compelling circumstances.
Previewing 2 of 2 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“his obligation to provide health insurance should continue only as long as insurance coverage is reasonably available to him, as in his present employment, at a reasonable rate”
The court's modification of the health insurance requirement to include a reasonableness standard.
A former husband appealed a final judgment of dissolution of marriage that awarded lump sum and rehabilitative alimony, child support, payment of mari…
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 Grandparent Visitation Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, the former husband, appeals the final judgment of dissolution of marriage.
We affirm the trial court’s award of lump sum and rehabilitative alimony, child support, and payment of marital debts, and its determination that the former wife could relocate the children to Texas, as all these rulings are supported by the law and the evidence.
However, we reverse that portion of the order requiring the former husband to maintain health insurance for the benefit of the children. The former wife concedes that his obligation to provide health insurance should continue only as long as insurance coverage is reasonably available to him, as in his present employment, at a reasonable rate. § 61.13(1)(b), Fla.Stat. (1993). Similarly, the former wife concedes that the trial court’s order restricting the children’s contact with the children’s grandparents, her former in-laws, should be stricken. Teague v. Teague, 551 So. 2d 1242, 1243 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), rev. denied, 562 So. 2d 347 (Fla.1990).
Finally, with regard to the former husband’s contention that the trial court should have made cross-awards of the parties’ remaining two parcels of real property rather than leaving the parties as cotenants of these properties, we find that this can as easily be accomplished by agreement of the parties as by order of the court. In fact, the former wife has stated in her brief that she is willing to take one property and allow the former husband to take the other. AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
SMITH, JOANOS and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jackson v. State, 653 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…or to issuance of this court’s mandate in Case No. 93-1995 on September 27, 1994. Washington v. State, 637 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Therefore, we reverse and remand for resentencing in accordance with this court’s opinion in Jackson v. State, 641 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). BOOTH, JOANOS and WOLF, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Teague v. Teague, 551 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)