EMMANUEL MANOLACIDIS, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Otto Hans van Maerssen v. Gerdts, 213 So. 3d 952 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
  …d, as established by competent, substantial evidence. We further find that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding the wife “undifferentiated” spousal and child support instead of calculating them separately. See Greenhouse v. Greenhouse, 913 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Blum v. Blum, 769 So. 2d 1142, 1143 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). The trial court’s failure to specify which share of the award was for spousal [*954] support and which share was for child support has compounded our difficulty in evaluat…
• Burnstine v. Townley, 976 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
  …dence of his income from his financial affidavit and loan application. A child support determination is within the sound discretion of the trial court, subject to the statutory guidelines and the reasonableness test. Matthews v. Montgomery-Matthews, 913 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). The trial court may weigh evidence of Burnstine’s income differently, and even disregard evidence when reasonable to do so. Here, however, the general magistrate and trial court abused their discretion in relying solely on evide…
• Jooste v. Jooste, 273 So. 3d 6 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)
  …ward that was alimony and the amount that was child support. See Van Maerssen v. Gerdts, 213 So. 3d 952, 953 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (holding that undifferentiated spousal and child support is an abuse of discretion (citing Greenhouse v. Greenhouse, 913 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Blum v. Blum, 769 So. 2d 1142, 1143 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000))). He also concedes that the court erred in failing to identify the parties’ respective incomes in its temporary relief order. See Lopez v. Regalado, 257 So. 3d 550,…

Authorities Cited

• Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
• Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)