SANDY C. KIRKCONNELL, APPELLANT,
v.
HILDA M. KIRKCONNELL, 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 a father's income is a sufficient basis to award child support, even if the mother agreed to waive it, provided the court approves it based on the child's welfare.
A husband and wife agreed that the wife would waive alimony and child support upon returning to her native New Zealand with their child. Despite this …
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 Waiver Of Alimony cases and more on FLexlaw
In 1962 Sandy Kirkconnell, a merchant mariner, met and married Hilda in New Zealand, to which she has now returned with their two-year-old daughter. She agreed to waive alimony and support and he agreed that she might return to her native land. Notwithstanding the agreement, the special master recommended $20 per week support and the trial judge allowed $15. Kirkconnell appeals.
Sedell v. Sedell, Fla.App.1958, 100 So.2d 639, is not in point. In that case the husband and wife agreed upon sums for support and modification without cause was disapproved. But in this case the wife agreed to waive alimony, which she may do, and support for the child, which she may not unless the court, concerned primarily with the child’s welfare, approves.
The appellant also contends that there is no evidence of the child’s needs. There is evidence that the father earned more than $10,000 in 1967 and allowed his wife $300 per month for household expenses. We hold this a sufficient basis for awarding $15.00 per week for support. The master had recommended a higher amount and the father offered no testimony of excessiveness. Cf. Walborsky v. Walborsky, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 853.
Affirmed.
LILES, C. I., and PIERCE, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
O'Brien v. O'Brien, 424 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…o. 2d 754 (Fla.1953). The right to receive support belongs to the child, Armour v. Allen, 377 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), and may not be waived by a parent. Strickland v. Strickland, 344 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Kirkconnell v. Kirkconnell, 222 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); see Gammon v. Cobb, 335 So. 2d 261 (Fla.1976); Melvin v. Melvin, 391 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Armour; Lang v. Lang, 252 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971). Claims for child support arrearages are generally enforceable, absent…
-
Kilpatrick v. McLOUTH, 392 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…iable and that the wife waived or released any right to alimony modification. Wife contends that such a provision should be void as against public policy. We disagree and affirm. A spouse can waive all right to alimony. Kirkconnell v. Kirkconnell, 222 So. 2d 441 (Fla.2d DCA 1969). Therefore, it logically follows that a spouse can waive the right to modification. Muss v. Muss, 390 So. 2d 415 (Fla.3d DCA 1980); Turner v. Turner, 383 So. 2d 700 (Fla.4th DCA 1980). Generally, one can waive any contractual, stat…
-
Hahn v. Hahn, 465 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)…a spouse may waive her right to alimony of any type (although not [*1354] child support, absent court approval) through an antenuptial or post-nuptial agreement. See Ivanhoe v. Ivanhoe, 397 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Kirkconnell v. Kirkconnell, 222 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). Such a waiver does not contravene public policy. Kilpatrick v. McLouth, 392 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). In Belcher v. Belcher, 271 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1972), the Florida Supreme Court held that agreements as to post-marriage1 alim…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Maxine Florence Sedell (now Maxine Sedell White) v. Sedell, 100 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)
- Brown v. State, 197 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)