PETER GEORGE CHRISTENSEN, FORMER HUSBAND, APPELLANT,
v.
TANYA RAQUEL CHRISTENSEN, FORMER WIFE, 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 dissolution of marriage case, the Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's child support calculation, finding that the court failed to include alimony as income when determining Mr. Christensen's child support obligation and improperly applied a substantial time-sharing adjustment without a clear basis in the visitation order.
The trial court erred in failing to include alimony as part of Mrs. Christensen's income when calculating child support. The court also erred in applying the substantial time-sharing adjustment when it was unclear from the visitation order whether Mrs. Christensen would exercise the statutorily required amount of visitation. The child support determination must be reversed and remanded for recalculation.
[1] In dissolution of marriage cases requiring alimony due to income disparity, alimony must be determined first, and then child support must be calculated considering alimon…
[2] A trial court errs in calculating child support if it fails to include an alimony award as part of the recipient's income.
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“In a dissolution of marriage case such as this one, in which alimony is required because of the disparity in income between the parties, the court must first determine the amount of alimony and then, considering alimony as income, determine the amount of child support.”
Establishes the mandatory legal framework for calculating child support when alimony is awarded due to income disparity
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePeter and Tanya Christensen were divorced after an eighteen-year marriage. The trial court awarded alimony to Mrs. Christensen due to income disparity…
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 Child Support Calculation cases and more on FLexlaw
Peter George Christensen, the former husband, appeals the final judgment of dissolution that dissolved his eighteen-year marriage with Tanya Raquel Christensen, the former wife. Mr. Christensen raises multiple issues on appeal, but we find merit in only one; his claim of error regarding the trial court’s calculation of the parties’ child support obligations. We affirm all other issues without further comment.
“In a dissolution of marriage case such as this one, in which alimony is required because of the disparity in income between the parties, the court must first determine the amount of alimony and then, considering alimony as income, determine the amount of child support.” Pike v. Pike, 932 So.2d 229, 230 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); § 61.30(2)(a)9., Fla. Stat. (2012). Here, the trial court failed to include its award of alimony as part of Mrs. Christensen’s income when it calculated Mr. Christensen’s child support obligation. Moreover, the trial court also adjusted the parties’ child support obligation based on the assumption that Mrs. Christensen would exercise a substantial amount of time-sharing pursuant to section 61.30(ll)(b), Florida Statutes (2012). However, it is unclear from the court’s visitation order whether Mrs. Christensen will exercise the statutorily required amount of visitation. We reverse the trial court’s child support determination and remand with directions to calculate the support obligation taking into account Mrs. Christensen’s income from alimony and to reconsider whether the substantial time-sharing adjustment is applicable to these parties. If necessary, the trial court is permitted to reconsider its visitation order when making this determination. We affirm all other issues raised on appeal.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
WOLF, ROWE, and OSTERHAUS, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
De La Piedra v. De La Piedra, 243 So. 3d 1052 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)…We also find that the child support calculation amount improperly accounted for the alimony award. In calculating income for child support purposes, alimony must be included as income. See § 61.30(2)(a)(9), Fla. Stat.; Christensen v. Christensen, 147 So. 3d 118, 119 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). The spousal support amounts should also have been deducted from Appellant’s income. § 61.30(3)(g), Fla. Stat. In this case, the worksheets used by the court did not include alimony in Appellee’s income and did not accou…
-
Baranowski v. Tesh (Fla. 2d DCA 2026)
Authorities Cited
- Pike v. Pike, 932 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)