CLINT STEVEN BROWN, APPELLANT,
v.
ANGELA BROWN, 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 reversed a contempt order for failure to pay alimony because the trial court failed to expressly find that the former husband had the present ability to pay support, as required by Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.615(d)(1).
An order finding contempt for failure to pay alimony must contain an express finding that the contemnor had the present ability to pay support.
[1] An order finding contempt for failure to pay alimony must expressly find that the contemnor had the present ability to pay support as required by Florida Family Law Rule…
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 intelligenceClint Steven Brown was found in indirect civil contempt for failure to pay alimony to Angela Sue Brown. The trial court entered general findings regar…
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 Willful Failure To Comply cases and more on FLexlaw
Clint Steven Brown (“Former Husband”) appeals the trial court’s order of indirect civil contempt for failure to pay alimony to Angela Sue Brown (“Former Wife”). Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.615(d)(1) provides:
An order finding the alleged contemnor to be in contempt shall contain a finding that a prior order of support was entered, that the alleged contemnor has failed to pay part or all of the support ordered, that the alleged contemnor had the present ability to pay support, and that the alleged contemnor willfully failed to comply with the prior court order. The order shall contain a recital of the facts on which these findings are based.
(emphasis added). Here, despite including general findings regarding Former Husband’s finances, the trial court failed to expressly find that he had the present *782ability to pay support. The absence of such a finding warrants reversal “for the limited purpose of allowing the trial court to enter an order in compliance with rule 12.615(d)(1).” Trisotto v. Trisotto, 966 So.2d 986, 988 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); accord Holtz v. Holtz, 95 So.3d 457, 458 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). Thus, we reverse and remand for entry of a compliant order.
REVERSED and REMANDED with Instructions.
SAWAYA and BERGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Trisotto v. Trisotto, 966 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)
- Holtz v. Holtz, 95 So. 3d 457 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)