DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, APPELLANT,
v.
CLARA LUZ RESENDIZ AND DANIEL ANDRES MARAVILLA, APPELLEES
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 Florida Department of Revenue's appeal of a child support order is vacated because the administrative law judge erred by limiting the father's child support obligation to amounts in the proposed order rather than establishing it based on evidence presented at the hearing.
An administrative law judge must establish a father's child support obligation based on evidence presented at the hearing, not limit it to amounts in a proposed order.
[1] An administrative law judge determining child support must base the obligation on evidence presented at the hearing rather than limiting it to amounts proposed by a party…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Department of Revenue appealed a Final Administrative Support Order determining the child support obligation of Daniel Andres Maravilla. New infor…
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 Evidentiary Hearing Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
The Florida Department of Revenue raises two issues in this appeal of a Final Administrative Support Order determining the child support obligation of Appellee Daniel Andres Maravilla (the father). In the first issue, the Department argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ) erred by concluding that he lacked authority to enter a support order exceeding the amounts set forth in the Department’s Proposed Final Administrative Support Order based on new information developed at an evidentiary hearing that would increase the father’s child support obligation under the statutory child support guidelines. In the second issue,, the Department argues that the Final Administrative Support Order is .not supported by competent, substantial evidence. Consistent with our opinion in Department of Revenue v. Reyes, No. 1D15-707, 181 So.3d 1270, 2015 WL 9584862 (Fla. 1st DCA Dec. 31, 2015), we resolve both issues by concluding that the ALJ was required to establish the father’s child support obligation based on the evidence presented at the hearing. By limiting the father’s child support obligation to the amounts contained in the proposed - order, notwithstanding the evidence presented, the Final Administrative Support Order is contrary to Florida law and not- supported by competent, substantial evidence. Accordingly, *812we vacate.,the order and remand for further proceedings.
WETHERELL, ROWE, and RAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Audely Hernandez v. Yosviel Guerra & Dep't of Revenue, 230 So. 3d 514 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…hat ALJ was required to consider all available and admissible information in determining child support obligation under section 409.2563 and was not limited to amounts set forth in Department’s proposed order); see also Dep’t of Revenue v. Resendiz, 182 So. 3d 811, 811 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (vacating Final Administrative Support Order where ALJ limited child support obligation to amounts stated in proposed order: the ALJ was' required to establish the father’s child support obligation based on the evidence pres…
Authorities Cited
- Dep't OF Revenue v. Reyes, 181 So. 3d 1270 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)