MICHELE J. CLARK, APPELLANT,
v.
LAWRENCE R. CLARK, 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 the trial court erred in reducing temporary support without notice to the wife.
The trial court sua sponte reduced the wife's temporary support during a contempt hearing initiated by the wife. The wife had not been given notice th…
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 Sua Sponte cases and more on FLexlaw
In this dissolution of marriage proceeding, Michele J. Clark (the Wife) appeals a nonfinal order entitled “Order on Wife’s Motion for Contempt.” In the order, the trial court stated that it was sua sponte reducing the Wife’s previously ordered temporary support but did not rule on the Wife’s contempt motion. The order resulted from a noticed contempt hearing against Lawrence R. Clark (the Husband), and the Husband had not filed a motion to reduce the temporary support.
Because the Wife had no notice that the issue of a modification of temporary support would be considered at the contempt hearing, the Husband properly concedes error on appeal, citing Wright v. Wright, 654. So.2d 674, 674 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), and Dent v. Dent, 851 So.2d 819, 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (Stringer, J., concurring specially). Based on the lack of notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard, see Wright, 654 So.2d at 674, we reverse the Order on Wife’s Motion for Contempt that was rendered on March 17, 2014. We remand for reinstatement of the temporary support obligation ordered on September 24, 2012.1 See id.
Reversed and remanded.
VILLANTI and CRENSHAW, JJ, Concur.