DANIEL M. PORUSH, APPELLANT,
v.
NANCY PORUSH, 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.
In this family law appeal, Daniel Porush challenges a trial court order suspending his driver's license and motor vehicle registration for failure to pay child support. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the trial court failed to comply with Florida family law rules requiring it to set a purge amount and make a finding of present ability to pay before imposing such contempt sanctions.
The trial court erred by ordering the suspension of Porush's driver's license and motor vehicle registration without including a purge provision based on his present ability to pay. The court must determine Porush's present ability to pay and include this finding in the amended contempt order before such sanctions can take effect.
[1] A court order authorizing the suspension of a driver's license and motor vehicle registration for failure to pay child support must include a purge amount and a finding o…
[2] Revocation of a delinquent child support obligor's driver's license and motor vehicle registration is a sanction permissible to obtain compliance with a support order.
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“If the court orders incarceration, a coercive fine, or any other coercive sanction for failure to comply with a prior support order, the court shall set conditions for purge of the contempt, based on the contemnor's present ability to comply.”
Establishes the mandatory requirement that courts set purge conditions based on present ability to pay when imposing coercive contempt sanctions
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 wife's clerk notified Daniel Porush of a $368,022.75 child support delinquency. Porush testified he had made payments of $50,000 and $104,4…
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 Civil Contempt Sanctions cases and more on FLexlaw
Daniel Porush, the former husband, appeals a non-final order, authorizing the suspension of his driver’s license and motor vehicle registration for failure to pay child support. We reverse and remand for the trial court to amend its contempt order to include a purge amount and a finding of the former husband’s present ability to pay it.
The clerk of the lower court, per the request of the former wife, notified the former husband of a $368,022.75 delinquency in his child support payments. In response, the former husband filed a verified motion to contest the delinquency. At the hearing on this matter, the former husband, in pertinent part, testified that he had made child support payments of $50,000 and $104,450 that had not been recorded in the clerk’s ledger. The trial court, adopting the magistrate’s findings, entered an order, in pertinent part, directing the clerk to reduce the delinquency by $154,450, but also finding the former husband delinquent and directing the clerk to process the suspension of his driver’s license and motor vehicle registration.
Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.615 governs civil contempt proceedings in support matters related to family law cases and limits the use of civil contempt sanctions under the rule to those used to compel compliance with a court order and those used to compensate a movant for losses sustained as a result of a contem-nor’s willful failure to comply with a court order. Revocation of a delinquent child support obligor’s driver’s license and motor vehicle registration is a possible sanction to obtain compliance. § 61.13016, Fla. Stat. (2008). “If the court orders incarceration, a coercive fine, or any other coercive sanction for failure to comply with a prior support order, the court shall set conditions for purge of the contempt, based on the contemnor’s present ability to comply.” Fla. Fam. L.R.P. 12.615(e) (emphasis added). See also Larsen v. Larsen, 901 So.2d 327, 329 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (“[T]he sanction of driver’s license suspension must be considered a contempt sanction ... for which the court must find a present ability to pay any purge amount set.”).
In the instant case, the trial court erred in neglecting to include a purge provision in its contempt order that authorized the immediate revocation of the former husband’s driver’s license and motor vehicle registration. Prior to setting a purge provision, the trial court will need to determine the former husband’s present ability to pay such an amount. This finding should be included in the order. As to the other issues raised on appeal and not withdrawn, we affirm without discussion.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
GROSS, C.J., and TAYLOR, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Salters v. Dep't OF Revenue, 32 So. 3d 777 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)…dy. He may seek a modification of the final administrative support order as set forth in section 409.2563(12), or he may seek a superseding order in the circuit court pursuant to section 409.2563(10)(c). See Miley v. Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Barker, 23 So. 3d 1284, 1284 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (noting same). . The Department also calculated retroactive support for the periods of January to December 2007, January 2008, and February to August 2008. It then added all of the periods of retroactive support together t…
-
Desmond D. Dillion v. Dep't OF Revenue, 189 So. 3d 353 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…t any mention of the parties’ time-sharing arrangement. If an agency enters an order on undisputed evidence, the order must be upheld by this court if it is supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Miley v. Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Barker, 23 So. 3d 1284 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). However, if this court finds that the validity of the agency action depends on disputed facts, and there has been no hearing prior to agency action, this court “shall” remand for “further proceedings.” § 120.68(7)(a), Fla. Stat.…
-
Courage v. State of Fla. Dep't OF Revenue, 53 So. 3d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Miley v. Dep’t of Revenue ex rel Barker, 23 So. 3d 1284 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). GROSS, C.J., STEVENSON and GERBER, JJ., concur.…
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
- Larsen v. Larsen, 901 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)