The First District Court reversed today in Gilbert v. Cole, a case in which the parties’ divorce decree allocated support for each child, but their mediated modification agreement did not. Because of this, the Appellee argued, she was entitled to seek judgment as to arrearages accruing after the older child’s emancipation but prior to the filing of a petition for modification. The lower court agreed, and awarded arrearages through the date of filing of the petition for modification. The First District, however, found first that the parties’ mediated agreement changed only the amount of support to be paid, and that the final judgment controlled as to all other support issues. Next, the First District found that the final judgment created an allocated support award, 50% to each child. In addition, the First District pointed out that if there was a miscalculation in the arrearages, the obligor would have been entitled to a retroactive modification prior to the filing of the petition. The case was as such remanded for the lower court to determine the correct arrearages based on these findings.
Friday, May 18, 2012
First District Court Reverses Denial of Injunction Modification
The First District Court of Appeal reversed today in Ramirez v. Teutsch, in so doing finding that the lower tribunal erred when it summarily denied a motion to dissolve a domestic violence injunction on the grounds of changed circumstances. The First District found that on a showing of changed circumstances and a showing that the scenario giving rise to the injunction no longer exists, modification may be warranted, and as such an evidentiary hearing was required.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Second DCA Reverses Dependency Finding
The Second District Court of Appeal ruled today in S.T. v. Department of Children & Family Services, a case in which the finding of dependency as to the father was upheld without opinion in December of last year, and in which the Court now reviewed the finding that the parties’ children were dependent as to their mother. The lower tribunal had made this finding primarily on the basis that the mother was in denial as to the father’s drinking and resulting endangerment of the children. The Second District, however, found that there was no competent evidence to reflect that the Mother had knowledge of any such endangerment, and that her motion for judgment of dismissal should have been granted, and the dependency finding not made. Judge Altenbernd, specially concurring, made clear that he was not suggesting the prior affirmation of the finding of dependency to the father was in any way incorrect, and made the point that the lower tribunal would still require the mother to take certain actions via the case plan, and that if she did not comply that court still had recourse.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
First District Reverses Fee Award for Lack of Hearing
The First District Court reversed today in Giovanini v. Giovanini, a case in which the lower tribunal issued an order granting temporary appellate attorneys’ fees based on the parties’ respective memoranda, without a hearing. The First District Court found that the trial court should not have determined the amount of the attorneys’ fee award when a previous order made clear that determination would be made at a hearing, and that the court was required, absent a stipulation by the parties, to hold a hearing to determine the reasonableness and necessity of the fee.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Second District Rejects Modification of Timesharing
The Second District Court of Appeal today reversed in Mayo v. Mayo, in so doing finding error in the lower court’s ruling which modified timesharing while professing that the best interests of the child could not be reached. Without reviewing the best interests of the minor child, the modification was improper, according to the Second District.
Fourth District Reverses Life Insurance Security
The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed on all issues today in Elbaum v. Elbaum, reversing only as to the issue of life insurance ordered as security for alimony, in that the requisite findings for such an award were not made. The Court also addressed the issue of alimony, argued by the Former Husband to be excessive, only in order to point out an apparent misunderstanding by the Former Husband of his alimony obligation.
Fourth District Court Affirms Child Support Credit
The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed today in Randazzo v. Randazzo, in so doing finding that there was no error apparent on the face of an order granting a child support credit to the Former Husband as a result of overpayment, despite the trial court’s use of a different figure for the Former Husband’s income than the Magistrate found to be appropriate. Largely the ruling had to be affirmed in that there was no transcript provided to the Appellate Court.