DAVID MARKIN, APPELLANT,
v.
SUSAN MARKIN, APPELLEE
DAVID MARKIN, APPELLANT,
SUSAN MARKIN, APPELLEE
813 So. 2d 1078
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2002)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We reverse an order finding appellant in contempt for failing to pay support. Appellant argues that the trial court erred in failing to give him an opportunity to defend against the motion for contempt by testifying, Walker v. Edel, 727 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), and that there was no finding by the trial court that appellant willfully failed to comply with the prior court order, Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla.1985). We agree with both of those arguments and therefore reverse.
KLEIN, FARMER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baime v. Baime, 912 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…l order to the extent that it includes an income deduction order. In all other respects, we affirm. Section 61.1301, Florida Statutes, does not allow income deduction orders to be used solely for the payment of attorney’s fees. Spalding v. Spalding, 813 So. 2d 1078, 1079 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). In Spalding, this court disallowed an income deduction order for attorney’s fees because the fees were not incurred in “securing payment of support or alimony.” Id. Here, the fees resulted from actions brought by both pa…
-
Diaz v. Diaz, 66 So. 3d 983 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…gor’s [*985] support obligation including any attorney’s fees or costs owed and forward the deducted amount pursuant to the order.” Because section 61.1301 is in derogation of the common law, it must be strictly construed. See Spalding v. Spalding, 813 So. 2d 1078, 1079 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). We interpret section 61.1301(1)(a) as authorizing an income deduction order to collect attorney’s fees incurred as a result of securing and collecting child support and/or alimony. This does not mean that any time an indiv…1 / 2
-
Achurra v. Esperanza (Loretta) Achurra, 71 So. 3d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…obtained from the pre-paid college accounts. Section 61.1301(l)(b)l establishes the purposes for which an income deduction order may be used. This statute is in derogation of common law and, thus, must be strictly construed. Spalding v. Spalding, 813 So. 2d 1078, 1079 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). It authorizes the use of an income deduction order to “[djirect a payor to deduct from all income due and payable to an obligor the amount required by the court to meet the obligor’s support obligation including any attorn…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Eugenia Bowen & the Fla. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 1985)
- Walker v. Edel, 727 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)