TRACY L. SIMS, APPELLANT,
v.
EDDIE E. SIMS, 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 appellate court reversed a final judgment of dissolution of marriage because the trial judge failed to address and resolve the issue of unpaid temporary spousal and child support that accrued before the trial. This omission meant the arrearage could not be enforced post-judgment.
Yes, a final judgment of dissolution of marriage must adjudicate and dispose of temporary support arrearages that accrued before the final hearing. Failure to do so prevents post-judgment enforcement of those arrearages.
[1] A trial court must adjudicate and dispose of the issue of unpaid temporary spousal and child support accruing before trial in a final judgment of dissolution of marriage.
[2] Failure to address temporary support arrearages in the final judgment prevents post-judgment enforcement of such arrearages.
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“We reverse a final judgment of dissolution of marriage because of the failure of the trial judge to adjudicate and dispose of the issue concerning the husband’s failure to pay temporary spousal and child support accruing before trial.”
Establishes the reason for reversal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDuring a dissolution of marriage action, the husband failed to pay temporary spousal and child support ordered prior to the final hearing. The final j…
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 Temporary Child Support cases and more on FLexlaw
FARMER, J.
We reverse a final judgment of dissolution of marriage because of the failure of the trial judge to adjudicate and dispose of the issue concerning the husband’s failure to pay temporary spousal and child support accruing before trial.1
Nonpayment of temporary child support and alimony during the pendency of a dissolution action should be addressed at the final hearing so that the trial court may fix the amount of any prejudgment arrearage and, if necessary, make an appropriate adjustment in the distribution of assets and liabilities in the final judgment. Scott v. Scott, 643 So. 2d 1124, 1127 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). If provision for payment of a temporary support arrearage is not incor porated in the final judgment, we have held that the court may not enforce such an arrearage in post-judgment proceedings. Roth v. Roth, 658 So. 2d 1225, 1226 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (final judgment in dissolution of marriage proceeding failed to preserve wife’s right to temporary support arrearage that husband had accumulated at time of final hearing, warranting reversal; even though final judgment acknowledged outstanding obligation and in no way abolished it, the final judgment contained no language requiring payment of outstanding obligation); see also Scott, 643 So. 2d at 1127; Bird v. Bird, 385 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).
We remand in order for the trial court to dispose of this issue, as to which it shall also be necessary to determine the date from which such temporary support should have been paid.
REVERSED.
HAZOURI and MAY, JJ., concur. . Although the final judgment of dissolution of marriage made reference to unpaid temporary support predating the final judgment, it failed to make any disposition of that issue, saying instead:
"Any unpaid amounts of either temporary spousal or temporary child support pursuant to the 'Order on the Wife's Motion for Temporary Relief' dated December 21, 1999, shall remain outstanding until paid, and the Court reserves jurisdiction to enforce same.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Schumaker v. Schumaker, 931 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…ation language into the final judgment rather than referencing it. Once a final judgment of dissolution is rendered, the final judgment supersedes any prior temporary orders., Bell v. Bell, 664 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). See also Sims v. Sims, 846 So. 2d 1188, 1189 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Roth v. Roth, 658 So. 2d 1225, 1226. (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). In this' case, it appears any defect, if there is one, is purely a scrivener’s error. The trial court clearly referenced the provisions of the temporary order and…
-
Burnett v. Burnett, 995 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…at the final hearing so that the trial court may fix the amount of any prejudgment arrearage and, if necessary, make an appropriate adjustment in the final judgment. See Conte v. Conte, 858 So. 2d 1165, 1166 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (quoting Sims v. Sims, 846 So. 2d 1188, 1188 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)). Although the Husband did not have a vested interest in the precise amount of the temporary child support award, the court was required to address whether the award was appropriate or subject to adjustment based upon the e…
-
Conte v. Conte, 858 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…on should be addressed at the final hearing so that the trial court may fix the amount of any prejudgment arrearage and, if necessary, make an appropriate adjustment in the distribution of assets and liabilities in the final judgment.” Sims v. Sims, 846 So. 2d 1188, 1188 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Once a court enters a final judgment, temporary support orders are no longer enforceable unless a claim for arrearages is addressed in the final judgment or the court reserves jurisdiction to consider the claim. Id. at 118…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bird v. Bird, 385 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- Scott v. Scott, 643 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Jac A. Roth v. Roth, 658 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)