REBECCA CHATWOOD LANCASTER, F/K/A REBECCA CHATWOOD MCGOWIN, APPELLANT,
v.
SAMUEL CHATWOOD MCGOWIN, JR., 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 reversed trial court's denial of mother's child support arrearage claim, holding that child support arrearages are vested rights that cannot be cancelled absent extraordinary circumstances like waiver or estoppel.
Child support arrearages constitute vested rights inuring to the benefit of the child and cannot be cancelled or retrospectively reduced absent extraordinary or compelling circumstances such as waiver, laches, estoppel, or reprehensible conduct by the custodial parent.
[1] Child support arrearages are vested rights inuring to the benefit of the child and cannot be cancelled or retrospectively reduced absent extraordinary circumstances such…
[2] An agreement purporting to relieve a parent of child support obligations may be relevant to the willfulness of nonpayment but does not affect the underlying obligation of…
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“the right to arrearages in child support is a vested right which inures to the benefit of the child. Absent extraordinary or compelling circumstances such as waiver, laches, estoppel, or reprehensible conduct on the part of the custodial parent, a trial court cannot cancel or retrospectively reduce the amount of past-due installments owed.”
Court's statement of the controlling legal standard for child support arrearages
Mother appealed trial court's final judgment denying her contempt motion against Father and implicitly denying her claim for child support arrearages.…
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 Equitable Defenses cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on appeal from the trial court’s final judgment denying Mother’s contempt motion against Father and implicitly denying Mother’s claim for child support arrearages. While we find that the trial court acted within its discretion in denying Mother’s contempt motion, we reverse and remand for a determination of the arrearage amount, payment thereof, and any equitable defenses thereto. See State, Dep’t of Health & Rehabilitative Serv. v. Burns, 654 So. 2d 1014, 1016 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (“[T]he right to arrearages in child support is a vested right which inures to the benefit of the child. Absent extraordinary or compelling circumstances such as waiver, laches, estoppel, or reprehensible conduct on the part of the custodial parent, a trial court cannot cancel or retrospectively reduce the amount of past-due installments owed.”); Armour v. Allen, 377 So. 2d 798, 799-800 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) (existence of an agreement purporting to relieve a party of child support payments may be a relevant factor going to the willfulness of that party’s failure to pay, but does not affect the obligation of child support as such); McClish v. Lee, 633 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 5th DCA) (although parents cannot contract away a child’s right to support, parties do have the right to contract as between themselves as to whom will assume particular support obligations), rev. denied, 640 So. 2d 1107 (Fla.1994).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
BOOTH, JOANOS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Baumann v. Agudelo (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
- Armour v. Allen, 377 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)
- McCLISH v. LEE, 633 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
- State v. Burns, 654 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)