LAURA HAYDAR LEVENTHAL, APPELLANT,
v.
MARVIN LEVENTHAL, 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 court held that denying retroactive child support when there is a need and ability to pay constitutes an abuse of discretion.
In a dissolution of marriage case, the former wife appealed the trial court's order regarding motions for rehearing and the final judgment. The former…
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 Retroactive Child Support cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this dissolution of marriage case, the former wife Laura Haydar Leventhal appeals the trial court’s order in which the court adopted and ratified excerpts of a hearing held on the parties’ motions for rehearing, and the final judgment. We affirm the orders on appeal, but reverse the trial court’s denial of retroactive child support to the former wife because its denial constituted an abuse of discretion.
A trial court abuses its discretion when it fails to award retroactive child support from the date of the filing of a petition for dissolution of marriage where there is a need for child support and an ability to pay. See Krufal v. Jorgensen, 830 So. 2d 228, 230 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Levi v. Levi 780 So. 2d 261, 263 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2001); Bardin v. Dep’t of Rev., 720 So. 2d 609, 611 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). The record reflects that the parties’ minor child needed support and the former husband had the ability to pay at the time during which the former wife filed her counter-petition for dissolution of marriage. In her counter-petition, the former wife requested child support. She also requested child support in her subsequent motion for temporary relief. It is undisputed that the former wife was unemployed outside of the home during the parties’ long term marriage. The trial court found that the former husband had a gross annual income of $50,750.00.
We thus see no reason that would preclude an award of retroactive child support in favor of the former wife from the time of the filing of the counter-petition for dissolution of marriage. Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s denial of retroactive child support in its final judgment, and affirm the final judgment in all other respects. The order on the parties’ motions for rehearing is likewise affirmed.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dickson v. Dickson, 204 So. 3d 498 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…30(17)(b). “A trial court abuses its discretion when it fails to award retroactive support from the date of the filing of a petition for dissolution of marriage where there is a need for child support and an ability to pay.” Leventhal v. Leventhal, 885 So. 2d 919, 920 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); see also Kowal v. Tomlinson, 780 So. 2d 172, 173 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Based on the foregoing, we reverse and remand for the trial court to apply the rebuttable presumption of permanent alimony. The court may again deny perma…
-
Martinez v. Abinader, 37 So. 3d 944 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)…er for the trial court’s discretion, a trial court typically abuses that discretion when it fails to award retroactive support from the date-of the filing of the petition and there is a need for support and an ability to pay. Leventhal v. Leventhal, 885 So. 2d 919, 920 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). In determining the Husband’s child support obligations on remand, the trial court must take into consideration his actual overtime pay and any actual income earned from part-time employment at secondary jobs, as well as any…
-
Rawson v. Rawson, 264 So. 3d 325 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Tish Bardin v. State, 720 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Levi v. Levi, 780 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
- Krufal v. Jorgensen, 830 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)