JOSEPH DENNIS JOHNSON, JR., APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
LAURA WILSON JOHNSON, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
In a dissolution of marriage case, the Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's awards of bridge-the-gap alimony and boat valuation, but reversed the rotating custody schedule and child support award because the schedule resulted in the child spending more nights with the non-primary residential parent than intended.
The court affirmed the alimony award and boat valuation but reversed the rotating custody schedule because it conflicted with the parties' agreement and court's intent that the wife be the primary residential parent. The court also reversed the child support award and remanded for reconsideration in light of the custody reversal.
[1] A rotating custody schedule is improper when the parties or court have designated one parent as the primary residential parent, as this designation implies the child's be…
[2] A child support award must be reversed and remanded when the underlying custody arrangement is reversed, requiring reconsideration of the child support amount.
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 intelligence“When the parties agree or the court orders that one parent is to be the primary residential parent, it is a determination that it is in the child's best interest to spend the majority of time with that parent.”
Establishes the legal principle that designating a primary residential parent means that parent should have majority custody time
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJoseph and Laura Johnson dissolved their marriage. The parties agreed that Laura would be the primary residential parent of their young child with Jos…
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 Primary Residential Parent cases and more on FLexlaw
THREADGILL, EDWARD F., Senior Judge.
Joseph Dennis Johnson, Jr., the husband, appeals the final judgment of dissolution of marriage and challenges the award of bridge-the-gap alimony, child support, and the valuation of a boat in the equitable distribution. Laura Wilson Johnson, the wife, cross-appeals and challenges the rotating custody schedule for their child and the termination date of her alimony award. We affirm, without further discussion, the alimony award, including its termination date, and the valuation of the husband’s boat in the equitable distribution. We reverse the rotating custody schedule and the amount of child support awarded to the wife.
The husband, in his brief and at oral argument, conceded that the court’s adaptation in the final judgment of the husband’s proposed visitation schedule results in a rotating custody award. The parties had agreed that the wife would be the primary residential parent of the parties’ young child and that the husband would have liberal rights of visitation. However, the court’s schedule results in the child actually spending more nights with the husband, which neither the parties nor the court intended, and is therefore error. When the parties agree or the court orders that one parent is to be the primary residential parent, it is a determination that it is in the child’s best interest to spend the majority of time with that parent. See Russenberger v. Russenberger, 669 So. 2d 1044, 1046 n. 7 (Fla.1996) (noting that in naming a custodial parent the court is making a determination that it is in the best interest of the child to be with the custodial parent). Accordingly, we reverse the award of rotating custody and remand for further proceedings on this issue.
In light of our reversal of the rotating custody schedule, we also reverse the award of child support and remand for the trial court to reconsider the amount of child support. On remand, the court should consider that the husband’s alimony obligation ends in September 2002, that the wife received substantial liquid assets which may produce some income even in today’s financial market, that the husband spends substantial time with the child, and any other factors which the trial court deems proper. See § 61.30(ll)(a), (b), Fla. Stat. (2001).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
WHATLEY and KELLY, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Howard v. State, 835 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…mary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. We affirm without prejudice to any right Howard might have to challenge the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act sentence imposed on him for attempted burglary. See Christopher v. State, 821 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Affirmed. NORTHCUTT, SALCINES, and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Russenberger v. Russenberger, 669 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 1996)