EFREM HARRELL, APPELLANT,
v.
CHARLOTTE HARRELL, 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 Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a child support modification order where the trial court failed to make adequate findings of fact regarding the imputation of the father's income from rental properties and gambling, and improperly recalculated child support without applying the statutory guidelines after an adult child's emancipation.
The trial court's modification order was reversed and remanded because: (1) the trial court failed to make specific findings of fact regarding the imputation of income from rental properties and gambling; (2) the trial court failed to recalculate child support according to the statutory guidelines for the remaining minor child; and (3) imputation of income from gambling requires reliable evidence that such income is regular and dependable.
[1] A party seeking modification of child support bears the burden of proving a significant change in circumstances with substantial competent evidence.
[2] A trial court's failure to recalculate child support according to guidelines after finding a party has not met the burden of proof for modification constitutes reversible…
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“The party seeking modification has the burden of showing a significant change in circumstances, by substantial competent evidence.”
Establishes the legal standard for modification of child support
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe former husband sought modification of child support based on the emancipation of an adult child. Evidence of the former husband's income from cert…
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 Burden Of Proof For Modification cases and more on FLexlaw
FARMER, J.
We reverse the decision of the trial judge in this proceeding to modify child support based on the emancipation of an adult child. The party seeking modification has the burden of showing a significant change in circumstances, by substantial competent evidence. Bernstein v. Bernstein, 498 So. 2d 1270, 1271-72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). The trial judge concluded that former wife had not met this burden, yet failed to recalculate monthly child support payments according to the requisite guidelines, the effect of which was to increase the amount of child support for the only remaining unemancipated minor child. Evidence of former husband’s income from certain rental properties and gambling was introduced, but no specific findings were made so as to permit the imputation of such income.
Because we are unable to conduct a meaningful review of the final order without findings of fact as to these and related matters, we reverse and remand for that purpose. See Harbus v. Harbus, 874 So. 2d 1230, 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (“If the trial court fails to do so, the case must be reversed and remanded for specific findings of fact.”); Tarnawski v. Tarnawski, 851 So. 2d 239, 242 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (same); Bimonte v. Martin-Bimonte, 679 So. 2d 18, 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (“When imputing income to a party, the trial court must set forth factual findings as to the probable and potential earnings level, source of imputed and actual income, and adjustments to income.”). We caution the trial judge that imputing income from gambling is dependent on reliable evidence that such income is regular and dependable.
Reversed.
GUNTHER, J., and KRATHEN, DAVID H., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marlowe v. Wally R. Marlowe, 123 So. 3d 1194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…Florida courts have consistently held that the imputation of income must be supported by factual findings as to the [*1196] “probable and potential earnings level, source of imputed and actual income, and adjustments to income.” Harrell v. Harrell, 947 So. 2d 638, 639 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). Particularized findings relating to the current job market, the party’s most recent work history, occupational qualifications, and the prevailing earnings level in the local community are all required to support an imputati…
-
Mai Nguyen v. Huong KIM Huynh, 147 So. 3d 639 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…he equitable distribution scheme in the supplemental final judgment and remand for the trial court to make additional findings of fact explaining the evidentiary source of the amount allocated to the former wife as rental income. Harrell v. Harrell, 947 So. 2d 638, 639 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). The trial court may revisit any other related financial issue to the extent that it is affected by any changes in the equitable distribution plan. Santiago v. Santiago, 51 So. 3d 637, 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). AFFIRMED in p…
Authorities Cited
- Bernstein v. Bernstein, 498 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)
- Elwira Tarnawski v. Janusz Tarnawski, 851 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Bimonte v. Martin-Bimonte, 679 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- Harbus v. Harbus, 874 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)