DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE O/B/O ANGELA MOORE, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT D. MOORE, 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 Department of Revenue appealed a trial court's order denying a contempt motion and writ of bodily attachment against Robert D. Moore for failure to pay child support arrears. The appellate court reversed, finding the trial court erroneously believed Moore was never notified to keep his address current with the court, when prior support orders had already provided such notice.
The appellate court held that the trial court erred in denying the contempt motion and writ of bodily attachment because: (1) prior support orders had advised Moore to keep his address current with the clerk and Department; (2) Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.615(b) permits service by mail if reasonably calculated to apprise the respondent of proceedings; and (3) the trial court's rejection of the hearing officer's report was based on an erroneous factual premise.
[1] A civil contempt motion and notice of hearing in family law proceedings may be served by mail if the mailing is reasonably calculated to apprise the alleged contemnor of…
[2] A trial court must promptly enter an order upon receiving a hearing officer's recommended order in a child support enforcement matter, unless good cause appears to amend…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“civil contempt motion and notice of hearing may be served by mail provided notice by mail is reasonably calculated to apprise the alleged contemnor of the pendency of the proceedings”
Establishes the legal standard for proper service in contempt proceedings under Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.615(b)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Department filed a contempt motion against Robert D. Moore for failing to pay child support arrears of $20,435.68 pursuant to a 1989 support order…
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 Presumption Of Ability To Pay cases and more on FLexlaw
SILBERMAN, Judge.
The Department of Revenue appeals an order disapproving the report and recommendation of a hearing officer and denying the Department’s motion for contempt and writ of bodily attachment. We reverse.
The Department filed a motion to hold Robert D. Moore in contempt for failing to pay child support pursuant to a 1989 support order. The motion gave notice of a hearing to be held before a child support enforcement hearing officer. After Mr. Moore failed to appear for the hearing, the hearing officer made the following written findings: (1) Mr. Moore was served with the motion and notice by regular U.S. mail; (2) the notice was sent to Mr. Moore’s last known address and a second address confirmed by postal verification and was reasonably calculated to apprise Mr. Moore of the pendency of the proceedings; (3) Mr. Moore was presumed to be in contempt for failure to pay outstanding arrears of $20,435.68; and (4) Mr. Moore was presumed to be able to pay that amount and had not rebutted the presumption. The hearing officer set a purge amount of $206 and recommended that the trial court enter a writ of bodily attachment.
The trial court reviewed the hearing officer’s report and recommendation and entered an order denying the writ of bodily attachment, denying the Department’s motion, and disapproving the report and recommendation. The trial court concluded that the “Notice of Hearing and Motion for Contempt were legally insufficient to put [Mr. Moore] on notice for the hearing as [Mr. Moore] was never advised to keep his address current with the Clerk of the Circuit Court or the Department of Revenue.”
Contrary to the trial court’s conclusion, in an earlier support order Mr. Moore had been advised to keep his address current by providing any change of address to the clerk of the court and to the Department.
Pursuant to Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.615(b), a “civil contempt motion and notice of hearing may be served by mail provided notice by mail is reasonably calculated to apprise the alleged contemnor of the pendency of the proceedings.” Additionally, Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.491(f) provides that upon receipt, the trial court shall review a recommended order and “enter an order promptly unless good cause appears to amend the order, conduct further proceedings, or refer the matter back to the hearing officer to conduct further proceedings.” Because the record reflects that the trial court’s rejection of the hearing officer’s report and recommendation was based on the erroneous belief that Mr. Moore was not told to keep his address current with the clerk of the court or the Department, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. On remand, the trial court must reconsider the report and recommendation and proceed in accordance with the applicable rules of procedure.
We note that the trial court may conduct a hearing to determine the propriety of the writ of bodily attachment before it is issued. See Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Meade v. Meade, 827 So. 2d 1093, 1094-95 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). If a writ of bodily attachment is issued, then upon incarceration Mr. Moore must be brought before the court within forty-eight hours for a determination of whether he continues to have the present ability to pay the purge amount. See Fla. Fam. L.R.P. 12.615(e).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
NORTHCUTT and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.