CORY STROLLA
v.
DAWN STROLLA
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 Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a temporary support order because the trial court awarded support without competent substantial evidence regarding the wife's expenses or the husband's ability to pay. The court emphasized that even broad judicial discretion in temporary relief orders must be grounded in evidentiary support.
The court reversed the temporary support order because the determination that the husband had the ability to pay was not supported by competent substantial evidence, as no evidence was presented regarding his ability to reduce monthly expenses. Even broad judicial discretion in temporary relief must be supported by competent substantial evidence as to both need and ability to pay.
[1] Temporary support orders in family law proceedings must be supported by competent substantial evidence demonstrating both the need of the recipient spouse and the ability…
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 intelligence“such orders must still be supported by competent substantial evidence as to need and ability to pay”
Establishes the governing legal standard that temporary relief orders, regardless of judicial discretion, require evidentiary support for both the spouse's need and the paying party's ability to pay.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCory Strolla appealed an order granting his wife Dawn Strolla temporary support in a dissolution of marriage case. The trial court found that the wife…
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 Temporary Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Cory Strolla (“Husband”) appeals an order granting his wife Dawn Strolla’s (“Wife”) motion for temporary relief in a dissolution of marriage case. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.
In its order granting Wife temporary support, the trial court determined that Wife presented no competent substantial evidence as to her current monthly expenses. The court nevertheless ordered Husband to pay various home expenses, finding that Husband has the ability to pay by reducing his individual monthly expenses. The court’s determination that Husband has the ability to pay the court-ordered amounts is not supported by competent substantial evidence because no evidence was presented below as to Husband’s ability to reduce his monthly expenses.
While we recognize that temporary relief orders are among the areas where trial judges have the broadest of discretion, such orders must still be supported by competent substantial evidence as to need and ability to pay. Van Maerssen v. Gerdts, 213 So. 3d 952, 953 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (citations omitted).
Accordingly, we reverse the temporary support order and remand for further consideration. On remand, the court may receive additional evidence, if necessary, regarding Wife’s present need and Husband’s ability to pay.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. DAMOORGIAN, LEVINE and FORST, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.