RENE CONTRERAS, APPELLANT,
v.
MARTHA CONTRERAS, 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.
In a post-judgment child custody modification case, the Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's transfer of custody from mother to father but reversed the requirement that father continue paying $2,500 monthly per child into a trust account, holding that a father has no legal obligation to continue child support when the mother has abducted the children in violation of court orders and prevents him from assuming custody.
The court reversed the requirement that the father continue child support payments to the trust account, holding that the father has no legal obligation to continue such payments under these circumstances. The court also reversed the provision creating a post-majority trust fund asset, finding it unauthorized as not a child support provision.
[1] A parent who abducts children in violation of court orders and refuses visitation may be relieved of child support obligations.
[2] A court order requiring a parent to continue child support payments to a trust for the benefit of children is improper when custody has been transferred to the other pare…
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“Because of (1) the court's change of custody of the three minor children to the husband, and (2) the wife's abduction of the three minor children to Honduras where she refuses to allow the husband to assume custody of the children in violation of court orders, we conclude it was error to require the husband to continue his child support payments of $2,500 a month per child”
Establishes the core holding that child support payments cannot be required when custody has been transferred to the paying parent and the other parent has abducted the children in violation of court orders.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThree minor children were abducted by their mother Martha Contreras and taken to Honduras in violation of court orders. The mother refused all visitat…
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 Custody Modification cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the husband Rene Contreras from a final order granting a motion to change custody of the parties’ three minor children in post-judgment modification proceedings following a final judgment of marriage dissolution. Athough the order appealed from changes the custody of the children from the wife Martha Contreras to the husband, the order further requires the husband to continue to pay $2,500 a month per child as child support into a trust account to be used by the court-appointed guardian of the minor children for the support of the parties’ three minor children — and to distribute one-third of the monies remaining in the trust account to each of three children when they reach the age of majority. We reverse in part.
The three minor children have been abducted by the wife in violation of court orders and taken to Honduras where they are now living with the wife; the wife refuses all visitation with the children by the husband, in violation of court orders. There has been utterly no contact between the court-appointed guardian of the children, who is to manage the child support trust fund, and the three minor children in Honduras. Moreover, the trial court has found that the wife has physically abused the children; based on this finding and the flagrant disregard of court orders regarding child visitation, the court transferred custody of the three minor children to the husband.
Because of (1) the court’s change of custody of the three minor children to the husband, and (2) the wife’s abduction of the three minor children to Honduras where she refuses to allow the husband to assume custody of the children in violation of court orders, we conclude it was error to require the husband to continue his child support payments of $2,500 a month per child, as required by the final judgment of marriage dissolution. Athough the court was well-motivated in attempting to provide some support for the children, the husband has no legal obligation to continue the child support payments under these circumstances. Curley v. Curley, 327 So. 2d 834, 835 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Warrick v. Hender, 198 So. 2d 348, 351 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967); Denton v. Denton, 147 So. 2d 545, 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962). Moreover, the provision of the order appealed from creating a post-majority asset for the children in a trust fund is not a child support provision and is unauthorized. Reeves v. Reeves, 554 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), rev. denied, 564 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 1990).
The final order under review is therefore reversed to the extent that it requires the husband to continue to make child support payments to a trust account managed by the coui’t-appointed guardian. In all other respects, however, the final order under review is affirmed.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Contreras v. Contreras, 696 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…ed for civil contempt because she took their children from Florida in violation of various orders in the matrimonial proceedings between her and [*507] the appellant. Contreras v. Contreras, 689 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Contreras v. Contreras, 645 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Contreras v. Contreras, 624 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). The purge provision is that she produce the children. In this appeal, the father seeks reversal of a final order granting her habeas corpus relief on the ground that a de…
Authorities Cited
- Joan Claire Hender Warrick (formerly known as Joan Claire Hender) v. Hender, 198 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)
- Widener v. Kellenberger, 147 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- Darrel W. Denton v. Denton, 147 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- Health Quest Corp. v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 554 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Curley v. Curley, 327 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)