Denial of Continuance Rejected by 3d DCA

The Third District Court today reversed the lower Court’s denial of a continuance in Quintero v. Kenyon, rejecting the trial and final judgment of paternity that followed as well.  The Third District Court relied on the facts that Mother’s counsel had withdrawn “on the eve of trial,” and there was no apparent showing of prejudice. 

Circuit Court Reversed in Administrative Support Action

The Fourth District Court today reversed a lower Court’s ruling in Dept. of Revenue v. Wardlaw in turn reversing a final judgment in an administrative support action.  The Fourth District held that jurisdiction to review final administrative support orders lies with the District, and not the Circuit Courts.

Fourth District Court Reverses Fee Award

The Fourth District Court of Appeal issued its opinion today in Phillips v. Ford f/k/a Phillips, in so doing reversing the lower Court’s award of fees and costs to the Former Wife on the basis that, while a finding was made as to the Former Husband’s superior ability to pay, no finding was made as to the Former Wife’s need, or her financial position.  The Fourth District reversed, citing Baime v. Baime, 850 So.2d 606 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) as analogous, in that in both cases the Court was required by statute to consider the financial resources available to both parties.

No Easy Road to Attorneys’ Fees

The Fourth District Court issued an opinion last week in Campbell v. Campbell, in so doing reversing a lower court ruling granting fees and costs to the Appellee.  In short, even when a default is in place, the lower tribunal will always be required to make sufficient findings to justify any award of fees.

Fifth District Court Recedes from its Rejection of Bridge The Gap

The Fifth District Court today issued an opinion in Engesser v. Engesser, a case which allowed only limited review due to the lack of a transcript, but did provide the Court with an opportunity to recede from its prior rulings, in Martin v. Martin, 582 So.2d 784 (Fla. 5^th DCA 1991), which disapproved of bridge the gap alimony. The ruling is narrowed to the existence of an award of this type, and does not provide a specific basis for the permissibility of the award, but each District Court has now recognized the existence of the form of relief and its potential propriety.

Fifth DCA Upholds Choice of Law Provision Despite Public Policy Argument

The Fifth District Court of Appeal issued its ruling in McNamara v. McNamara today, holding in part that the appeal of the lower tribunal's use of a choice of law provision was not reversible despite a claim by the Wife that, as Georgia recognizes no spousal privilege, the foreign law was contrary to Florida's public policy.

Disqualification of D.O.R. as Counsel Reversed

The First District Court, in an opinion issued yesterday in Dept. of Revenue v. Collingwood and Gray reversing the lower tribunal's ruling that the Department of Revenue was prohibited from representing a father seeking modification of support based on the father's unclean hands due to child support arrears. The Mother below, a former DOR client, had asked for disqualification of the D.O.R. based on conflict of interest. The Court granted the motion, but on the grounds that the father was in arrears and "it would be inequitable to allow the department to represent him against the mother, and that the department's efforts should be directed at enforcement of the existing support order." The First District first explained that there was no conflict, as the DOR's counsel represents the department and not either parent. As to the child support arrears, the Court of Appeal found that the statutory requirement of a review of child support obligations every three years and modification if appropriate is not linked to whether the payor is current in support payments.