CURTIS D. COLLINS, PETITIONER,

v.

MICHAEL W. MOORE, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ETC., RESPONDENTS

Citator

Cited By

• McDANIEL v. McDANIEL, 835 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
  …f $1,027.31, an amount which deviates more than 5% from the guidelines amount, without satisfying the statutory requirement of section 61.30(l)(a), quoted above, we reverse. See Swcmston v. Swanston, 746 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Mead v. Mead, 726 So. 2d 865, 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (directing the trial court to make findings mandated by section 61.30(l)(a) “so that intelligent appellate review will be possible”). On remand, the trial court should either recalculate the child support amount or make adeq…
• Chestnutt v. Chestnutt, 752 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
  …ere made by the trial court, and therefore, we remand for the trial court to make the proper findings. If the trial court alters the distribution of any assets, all other financial aspects of the judgment must likewise be reviewed. See Mead v. Mead, 726 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). The other deficiency on the face of the judgment pertains to the award of attorney fees to the appellee. There is no specific finding concerning the appellee’s attorney’s hourly rate and the number of hours reasonably expended…
• Tully v. Tully, 817 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
  …“Appellant’s failure to provide either a transcript or proper substitute, such as a stipulated statement of the facts, defeats the appellate court’s ability to review either the factual or legal basis for the trial court’s decision.”); Mead v. Mead, 726 So. 2d 865, 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); see generally Applegate v. Barnett Bank, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979). BARFIELD, WEBSTER, and BENTON, JJ., concur.…