Articles Posted in Child Support

Published on: | by

Courts can use civil contempt to enforce support orders, but incarceration is lawful as a coercive measure only when the person has a present way to comply. A recent Florida decision reversed a contempt order because it did not identify any specific funds available to satisfy the purge amount. The ruling illustrates the difference between a finding that support was unpaid and the separate proof needed before a court may jail someone for nonpayment. If you face support enforcement or contempt proceedings, a Miami child support attorney can help you understand the financial evidence and procedural protections at issue.

Facts and Procedural History

Reportedly, the parties married in 2020 and had a child. During their divorce, the trial court entered a temporary support order in February 2025 after finding that the husband had substantial monthly income. The order required temporary support, current child support, and payments toward arrears. After the wife asserted that he failed to comply, the court entered an initial contempt order and required a payment of $12,852 to avoid incarceration.

Allegedly, the wife later filed another contempt motion, stating that the husband had made one payment but missed further obligations. After an August hearing, the court set a purge amount exceeding $65,000. An amended September order found that the husband had the present ability to pay, questioned his credibility, and directed him to surrender if he did not pay. He was jailed, later released, and then jailed again following another hearing. His forensic accountant testified that his income and accessible assets could not cover the purge, while the wife offered no witnesses at that hearing. The husband appealed several orders, but later trial court action left only the amended September contempt order for appellate review. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Changing the label on a child support dispute does not necessarily open the federal courthouse doors. Federal civil rights law does not ordinarily authorize a federal trial court to overturn a state paternity or support judgment. A Florida federal decision shows how jurisdictional limits, state-action requirements, and pleading standards can defeat an attempted constitutional challenge. If you are disputing paternity, enforcement, or a family court order, it is in your best interest to consult an experienced Miami family law attorney about what remedies you may be able to pursue.

History of the Case

Allegedly, a self-represented plaintiff asked a federal district court to review state proceedings and set aside a 2010 paternity determination and related child support orders. The plaintiff asserted that he was not the children’s father and that fraud and due process violations led to the orders. He invoked 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and also advanced state-law theories.

Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Determining an appropriate financial outcome in a divorce requires more than simply dividing marital assets. Courts must also evaluate whether one spouse has a genuine need for support, whether the other spouse can pay, and how any alimony award will affect child support calculations. Because these issues are closely connected, an error in one part of the financial analysis can require additional proceedings even when much of the trial court’s judgment is otherwise correct. A recent Florida ruling demonstrates the broad discretion trial courts possess when fashioning equitable alimony awards while emphasizing the importance of accurately calculating child support. If you are facing a divorce involving significant assets, alimony, or child support issues, an experienced Miami family law attorney can help protect your financial future throughout the process.

History of the Case

Allegedly, the parties ended a marriage that had lasted more than 26 years and shared one minor child. Throughout much of the marriage, the former husband pursued a successful professional career that substantially increased his earnings. In contrast, the former wife worked part-time for several years after the parties’ child was born before eventually returning to full-time employment. During the marriage, the parties accumulated assets worth more than five million dollars.

It is alleged that following the parties’ separation, disputes arose regarding alimony, child support, and parental decision-making authority. After trial, the court awarded the former wife lump sum durational alimony, ordered child support, and granted the former wife ultimate decision-making authority for the parties’ child. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Administrative child support proceedings offer an efficient alternative to traditional court litigation, but they also operate under a unique statutory framework that limits who may seek appellate review. Parents often assume that any party dissatisfied with an administrative support decision may appeal directly to a district court of appeal. A recent Florida decision demonstrates that this is not always true and explains how the Legislature has restricted appellate jurisdiction in these cases. If you have questions about a child support matter or need guidance navigating Florida’s family law system, you should speak with a Miami family law attorney as soon as possible.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the Department of Revenue initiated administrative proceedings to establish child support, and an administrative law judge entered a final administrative support order that the Department later rendered. The parent receiving support was dissatisfied with the outcome and sought direct review in the district court of appeal after the final order was entered.

It is alleged that the appealing parent filed a notice of appeal seeking review of the administrative support order, believing that the appellate court had jurisdiction to consider challenges to the decision. The Department responded by filing a motion to dismiss, arguing that Florida’s statutory scheme authorizes only certain parties to seek direct appellate review of administrative support orders. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Determining child support requires courts to assess each parent’s financial circumstances accurately, but income calculations are not always as straightforward as reviewing a paycheck. Parents who reduce their work schedules to care for young children often face disputes over whether additional income should be attributed to them for support purposes. A recent Florida ruling demonstrates that trial courts must carefully evaluate childcare responsibilities before imputing income and calculating child support obligations. If you are involved in a paternity or child support dispute, speaking with a Miami family law attorney can help ensure your financial circumstances are fairly considered under Florida law.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the father initiated a paternity action involving the parties’ two minor children, and the mother responded by filing her own petition. The litigation involved multiple motions, amendments, and discovery disputes before the matter ultimately proceeded to a final hearing.

It is alleged that the father did not appear for the final hearing, although his attorney attended on his behalf. The trial court dismissed the father’s petition but addressed the mother’s petition. During the hearing, evidence showed that the mother had served as the children’s primary caregiver for several years and that the father had not had the children overnight for more than two years. The mother also testified that she worked only part-time because she cared for five minor children and lacked reasonable childcare alternatives.

Reportedly, the trial court entered a final judgment awarding shared parental responsibility while granting the mother ultimate decision-making authority. The court established a timesharing schedule, imputed additional income to the mother based on full-time minimum wage employment, and calculated both ongoing and retroactive child support using that higher income figure.

Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Divorce litigation often involves complicated financial issues that require trial courts to carefully identify assets, liabilities, support obligations, and attorney’s fee awards. When required findings are missing or property is improperly classified, even an otherwise thorough final judgment may not withstand appellate review. A recent Florida opinion demonstrates how failures to make sufficient factual findings can affect nearly every aspect of a dissolution proceeding and highlights the importance of preserving such errors for appeal. If you are involved in a high-asset divorce or complex financial dispute, you should speak with a Miami family law attorney to ensure your rights are protected at every stage of the litigation process.

Case History

Allegedly, the parties were involved in a contested dissolution of marriage proceeding that required the trial court to address numerous financial issues, including equitable distribution, temporary support obligations, valuation of a law practice, attorney’s fees, and the characterization of certain investment accounts.

It is alleged that after trial, the court entered a final judgment resolving the parties’ disputes. The judgment valued the husband’s law practice, addressed temporary support arrearages, distributed certain assets and liabilities, awarded attorney’s fees to the wife, and treated a brokerage account that predated the marriage as a marital asset. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

When parents separate, financial support for children and the division of family property can become some of the most emotionally charged and fiercely contested issues in a divorce. Courts are tasked not only with ensuring that children receive adequate financial support but also with fairly distributing the assets accumulated during a marriage, including items that carry significant sentimental value. A recent Florida decision illustrates how errors in addressing retroactive child support and marital property can require reversal and further proceedings, even after a final judgment has been entered. If you are involved in a divorce or custody dispute and have questions about child support, equitable distribution, or your parental rights, you should speak with a Miami family law attorney as soon as possible to protect your interests.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the parties were married in 2011 and shared one minor child. The husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage, and the wife responded with a counterpetition seeking related relief.

It is alleged that the parties separated and that the minor child primarily resided with the wife throughout most of the separation period. During the litigation, the wife sought retroactive child support and presented evidence concerning the child’s needs and the husband’s financial circumstances. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Child support disputes often extend beyond the question of how much support is owed going forward and look back to periods when one parent provided primary care without a formal support order in place. Florida courts have discretion in awarding retroactive child support, but that discretion narrows significantly when parties enter clear and enforceable agreed orders governing how support issues will be resolved. A recent opinion from a Florida court illustrates how trial courts must honor those agreements and reinforces that child support is a right belonging to the child, not a bargaining chip between parents. If you are litigating child support issues in Palm Beach County or elsewhere in South Florida, consulting with a Miami family law attorney can help ensure that court orders and stipulations are enforced as written. 

Factual and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff entered the marriage with substantial premarital wealth, and the parties executed a prenuptial agreement before marrying. During the marriage, the parties had two children, and the agreement did not purport to limit or waive child support obligations.

Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In family law, financial calculations must strictly comply with statutory requirements to ensure fairness and accuracy. When trial courts base support obligations on gross income rather than net income, the result can significantly overstate a parent’s ability to pay. A recent decision from a Florida court highlights this principle, reversing a trial court’s child support determination that improperly relied on gross income figures. If you are involved in a child support dispute in Florida, a Miami family law attorney can help ensure that all income calculations follow the statutory guidelines set forth in Florida law.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff and defendant were involved in dissolution proceedings. The plaintiff operated as a self-employed cosmetologist who rented a salon booth and bore responsibility for her supplies, tools, and licensing. Her federal income tax returns reflected that her reported business income was derived from gross receipts minus ordinary and necessary expenses. In 2019, she reported gross annual receipts of $62,287 with business expenses totaling $21,408, leaving $40,879 in annual business income. Her 2020 return showed a similar pattern, with reported business income after expenses of $29,269. For 2021, her testimony and financial affidavit indicated a gross monthly income after expenses of approximately $3,078.

It is alleged that the trial court concluded that both parties earned roughly equal incomes of about $60,000 per year and therefore determined that neither party was entitled to child support. The plaintiff appealed several of these rulings, challenging the trial court’s treatment of her income and the resulting child support calculations.  She argued, in part, that this finding was inconsistent with the documentary evidence, which demonstrated a significantly lower net income after business expenses and allowable tax deductions Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida, family law courts must exercise precision and completeness when entering final judgments, especially in matters involving child support and attorney’s fees. Omissions related to stipulated financial obligations or procedural safeguards may warrant reversal on appeal. A recent decision from a Florida court highlights how failure to incorporate stipulated arrearages and to reserve jurisdiction over attorney’s fees can result in partial reversal and remand, even when the underlying dissolution of marriage is otherwise affirmed. If you intend to end your marriage, it is important to understand how to protect your rights, and you should talk to a Miami divorce attorney as soon as possible.

Factual Setting and Procedural Background

It is reported that the parties’ marriage dissolved after the defendant discovered that the plaintiff had relocated to her parents’ residence in New Jersey with the parties’ three minor children. The defendant filed a petition for dissolution, while the plaintiff filed a separate petition seeking permanent relocation of the children to New Jersey. These matters were later consolidated and addressed during a single hearing in the trial court.

Allegedly, the trial court granted the dissolution but denied the plaintiff’s relocation request. It is further reported that during the hearing, the parties, through their counsel, entered a stipulation acknowledging the defendant’s arrearage in child support. The amount of this arrearage appeared in one of the defendant’s own prior filings, identified as a Direct Payment Inquiry Letter submitted a month before the hearing. Despite this, the final judgment stated that the defendant was current in his support obligations under a New Jersey order, directly contradicting the earlier stipulation. Continue reading ›

Contact Information
19790 W Dixie Hwy #412
Miami, FL 33180
Toll Free: 800.596.0579Phone: 305.932.6542Fax: 305.932.6453

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2026, Sandy T. Fox, P.A.
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design