Bowers v. State, Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Morgan

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bowers v. State, Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Morgan

6 So. 3d 79, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1890, 2009 WL 536672

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 5, 2009

Docket1D07-6489

StatusPublished

This text of 6 So. 3d 79 (Bowers v. State, Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Morgan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bowers v. State, Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Morgan, 6 So. 3d 79, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1890, 2009 WL 536672 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Bobby F. Bowers, Jr., appeals a final administrative child support order which establishes his current as well as his retroactive child support obligation. Bowers argues that the actual amount of child support already paid by him was not disclosed below. Bowers has not demonstrated, however, that he timely sought to introduce such specific evidence into the record below. Bowers further argues that, because his financial condition has changed since entry of the support order, the amount of child support ordered should be “reevaluated.” As a court of review, this court is precluded from considering matters outside of the record of the proceedings below. Thomber v. City of Fort Walton Beach, 534 So.2d 754, 755 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Because Bowers has not established any basis for reversible error on the record, the order is affirmed. See Hillsborough County Bd. v. Pub. Employees Relations Comm’n, 424 So.2d 132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (explaining that an appeal is not an evidentiary proceeding, so an appellate court will not consider evidence not presented to the lower tribunal because function of appellate court is to determine whether lower tribunal committed error based upon the issues and evidence before it).

AFFIRMED.

WEBSTER, VAN NORTWICK and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Bobby F. Bowers, Jr., appeals a final administrative child support order which establishes his current as well as his retroactive child support obligation. Bowers argues that the actual amount of child support already paid by him was not disclosed below. Bowers has not demonstrated, however, that he timely sought to introduce such specific evidence into the record below. Bowers further argues that, because his financial condition has changed since entry of the support order, the amount of child support ordered should be “reevaluated.” As a court of review, this court is precluded from considering matters outside of the record of the proceedings below. Thomber v. City of Fort Walton Beach, 534 So.2d 754, 755 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Because Bowers has not established any basis for reversible error on the record, the order is affirmed. See Hillsborough County Bd. v. Pub. Employees Relations Comm’n, 424 So.2d 132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (explaining that an appeal is not an evidentiary proceeding, so an appellate court will not consider evidence not presented to the lower tribunal because function of appellate court is to determine whether lower tribunal committed error based upon the issues and evidence before it).

AFFIRMED.

WEBSTER, VAN NORTWICK and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 So. 3d 79, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1890, 2009 WL 536672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowers-v-state-department-of-revenue-ex-rel-morgan-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack