CURTIS CLYDE HILL, APPELLANT,
v.
CHRISTY DENISE HILL, 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.
The court held that the provision for dividing uncovered medical expenses was enforceable as modified to apply only to non-elective, reasonable, and necessary expenses.
Appellant appealed a final judgment of dissolution of marriage and a contempt order, challenging a provision requiring him to share uncovered medical …
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 Appellate Review Of Discretionary Rulings cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge.
Curtis Hill appeals from an amended final judgment of dissolution of marriage, and from a subsequent order holding him in contempt. No transcript of the trial proceedings was made, nor was there presented to this court a statement of the evidence pursuant to Rule 9.200(b)(4), Fla.App. R. Therefore, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in the entry of the final judgment. Although a transcript of the contempt hearing is included in the record before us, we find no error in the court’s order. One provision of the amended final judgment requires discussion. It says: “The wife shall provide current levels of health insurance for the children. The parties shall divide evenly any uncovered expenses not covered as an additional form of child support.” Appellant argues that this provision imposes an open-ended and unlimited financial liability on him for the children’s medical expenses and is thus unenforceable, citing cases such as Warner v. Warner, 692 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) and Marsh v. Marsh, 553 So. 2d 366 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989).
We do not find these cases controlling. Rather we look to Schellhammer v. Schellhammer, 687 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) where the dissolution judgment required the husband to pay one-half of all noncovered elective and noneleetive medical expenses for the children. In that case this court modified the judgment to limit the obligation to one-half of noncovered nonelective medical expenses. In the case before us, we view the questioned provision to apply only to non-elective reasonable and necessary medical expenses, and we modify the amended final judgment to so provide. See also Patterson v. Cuervo, 683 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).
Except as modified herein, this amended final judgment and order of contempt are affirmed.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.
COBB and ANTOON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jackson v. York Hannover Nursing Ctrs., 876 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…Group Invs., Inc., 756 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Almodovar v. Almodovar, 754 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Scarlett v. Scarlett, 736 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Scotty’s Inc. v. Olivieri, 713 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); Hill v. Hill, 706 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). While there are other issues raised by the Personal Representative, we conclude that none merit reversal. AFFIRMED. PETERSON and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. . Fabre v. Marin, 623 So. 2d 1182 (Fla.1993). . We say "apparently” bec…
-
Oliver v. Oliver, 112 So. 3d 538 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…pendent children. We modify this provision to apply only to non-elective reasonable and necessary medical expenses. The former husband is not responsible for elective medical procedures, absent his express agreement or court order. See Hill v. Hill, 706 So. 2d 406, 407 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). AFFIRMED as MODIFIED. ORFINGER, C.J., GRIFFIN and EVANDER, JJ., concur.…
-
Romero v. State, 729 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)…ary denial where defendant alleged plea was based on affirmative misad-vice of counsel regarding the amount of time the defendant would actually serve on the sentence imposed); Eccleston v. State, 706 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Ripley v. State, 706 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). Accordingly, the order of summary denial is reversed, and we remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings. MINER, BENTON and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Warner v. Warner, 692 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
- Marsh v. Marsh, 553 So. 2d 366 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Schellhammer v. Schellhammer, 687 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
- Patterson v. Cuervo, 683 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)