DONALD SEWARD, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE O/B/O MICHELLE R. MCCLELLAN, 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.
A downward modification of child support is warranted when there has been a substantial, significant, material, involuntary, and permanent change in circumstances.
[1] A trial court is authorized to modify child support when there has been a substantial, significant, material, involuntary, and permanent change in the parties' circumstan…
[2] A general master's findings regarding a substantial change in circumstances for child support modification must be supported by the evidence.
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 intelligenceDonald Seward sought a reduction in child support due to a substantial decrease in income after leaving his previous employment due to workplace viole…
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 Petition For Modification Of Child Support cases and more on FLexlaw
BLUE, Acting Chief Judge.
Donald Seward appeals the denial of his petition for a reduction in child support; he argues that a downward modification is warranted based on a substantial change in circumstances. We agree and, accordingly, reverse.
The trial court adopted the general master’s recommended order, which found that Seward voluntarily left his previous employment, failed to show a diligent effort to obtain comparable employment, and thus failed to produce sufficient evidence to show a permanent change. After a careful review of the record on appeal, we conclude that the general master’s findings are not supported by the evidence.
In December 1996 or January 1997, Seward went on medical leave due to problems resulting from an incident or threatened incident of workplace violence. At the time, Seward was earning approximately $33,000 per year. Seward sought treatment and was advised not to return to work unless the employer was able to resolve the situation. The employer failed to do so, and Seward sought other employment.
Seward testified that he sent out nearly 40 applications and resumes for similar work but nothing materialized. Within a year, Seward obtained full-time employment. At the time of the hearing in this case, Seward had been working at his new job for two years and was earning approximately $18,000 a year. “A trial court is authorized to modify child support when there has been a substantial change in the parties’ circumstances. That change must be significant, material, involuntary and permanent in nature.” Fisher v. Fisher, 722 So. 2d 243, 245 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (citations omitted). On appeal, the standard of review is abuse of discretion. See Freeman v. Freeman, 615 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). Because the clear evidence showed a substantial change in circumstances, the trial court abused its discretion in denying the petition for modification of child support. Therefore, we reverse. On remand, the trial court shall compute Seward’s child support obligation based on his current employment.
Reversed and remanded.
SALCINES and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fredman v. Fredman, 917 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…e Mother’s Supplemental Petition for Modification.” This provision is read as the trial court’s denial of both requested modifications. Because our review of such a denial is based on an abuse of discretion standard, Seward v. Fla. Dep’t of Revenue, 794 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001),. and our review of the record discloses competent, substantial evidence to support the trial court’s denial of the requested modification of the child support provision, we affirm the trial court’s denial of that portion of the p…
-
Dep't OF Revenue v. Shirer, 197 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)…port, the Department’s petition may be viewed as a request for a modification of child support. We review a trial court’s decision regarding whether to modify child support for abuse of discretion. Seward v. Fla. Dep’t of Revernue ex rel. McClellan, 794 So. 2d 614, 615 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). “A trial court is authorized to modify child support when there has been a substantial change in the parties’ circumstances. That change must be significant, material, involuntary and permanent in nature,” id. (quoting Fishe…
-
G.S.P. v. K.B., 30 So. 3d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)…r, and we affirm the trial court’s order in all other respects. I.STANDARD OF REVIEW The standard of review from a grant or denial of a petition for modification of a child support award is abuse of discretion. See Seward v. Fla. Dep’t of Revenue, 794 So. 2d 614, 615 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). This court will affirm the award of child support if it is supported by substantial, competent evidence in the record. See Reddick v. Reddick, 728 So. 2d 374, 375 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). II.HEALTH CARE EXPENSES The trial cour…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Freeman v. Freeman, 615 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
- Fisher v. Fisher, 722 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)