LISA KAY MCGEE-MANIS, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
MARC ANTHONY MANIS, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
The court affirmed the trial court's reduction of child support and attorney's fee contribution but reversed and remanded to make the modification retroactive to the petition filing date.
A trial court does not abuse its discretion in reducing child support obligations or ordering contribution to attorney's fees, but must make such modifications retroactive to the petition filing date.
[1] A modification of child support must be made retroactive to the date the modification petition was filed.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe former husband sought to reduce his child support obligation from $500 to $345 per month and challenged an attorney's fee contribution of $1,200.…
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 Dissolution Actions cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, Judge.
Lisa Kay McGee-Manis (“former wife”) appeals an order modifying a final judgment of dissolution. The former wife argues that this order improperly allowed Marc Anthony Manis (“former husband”) to reduce his child support payments from $500 per month to $345 per month. The former husband cross-appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by failing to make the order retroactive to the date the modification petition was filed and by requiring the former husband to contribute $1,200 towards the former wife’s attorney’s fees. We affirm the trial court’s order in part and reverse in part.
We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in reducing the former husband’s child support obligation or in ordering the former husband to contribute towards the former wife’s attorney’s fees. See Wenz v. Collings, 417 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); cf. Deatherage v. Deatherage, 395 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 5th DCA), dismissed, 402 So. 2d 609 (Fla.1981). As the former wife concedes, however, the trial court erred when it failed to make this reduction retroactive to the date the petition was filed. Accordingly, we remand with instructions that the modification order be made retroactive to the filing date. See Witcher v. Petty, 534 So. 2d 1240, 1242 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), receded from on other grounds, Fabio v. Monell, 594 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (en banc). In all other respects, the trial court’s order is affirmed.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED with instructions.
PETERSON, C.J., and GOSHORN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Larry K. Meyer, P.A. v. Kimberly, 765 So. 2d 951 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…rivate employer who would ordinarily not be required to secure payment of compensation under chapter 440 because it has less than four employees and is not engaged in the construction industry. See § 440.02, Fla. Stat. (1995); Solomon v. Huddleston, 657 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). In the order under review the judge of compensation claims nevertheless determined that the injury suffered in the course and scope of employment by the appellee, an employee of the appellant, was compensable under principles of…
-
Poyner v. Smith, 693 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…PER CURIAM. We agree with appellant that the lower court erred in not making the ordered child support reduction retroactive to the date of filing the petition. See McGee-Manis v. Manis, 657 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), Witcher v. Petty, 534 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). However, we have no sufficient basis to reverse the amount of reduction determined by the lower court and otherwise affirm. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDE…
Authorities Cited
- Deatherage v. Deatherage, 395 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Witcher v. Petty, 534 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)
- Novella Nora Tucker v. State, 417 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Fabio v. Eusebio Monell, Jr., 594 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)