CHRISTINE MARIE SHENOI v. RAVEEN SHENOI
This text of CHRISTINE MARIE SHENOI v. RAVEEN SHENOI (CHRISTINE MARIE SHENOI v. RAVEEN SHENOI) 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.
Opinion
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
CHRISTINE MARIE SHENOI,
Appellant/Cross-Appellee,
v.
RAVEEN SHENOI,
Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
No. 2D21-1537
September 2, 2022
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Cynthia J. Newton, Judge.
Ingrid Anderson, Clearwater, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee.
Jane H. Grossman, St. Petersburg, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal brought by the former wife and cross-appeal
brought by the former husband challenging the final judgment of
dissolution and the amendment thereto entered following a partial grant of a motion for rehearing. We affirm the final judgment of
dissolution without further comment with one exception.
There is not a sufficient basis for this court to determine
whether the retroactive child support awarded included appropriate
consideration by the trial court of any amounts already paid for the
benefit of the child. See § 61.30(17)(b), Fla. Stat. (2020); Carter v.
Carter, 294 So. 3d 384, 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (finding error
where mortgage payments that were already paid for the benefit of
the child were not calculated into the retroactive child support
obligation and stating that "[s]ection 61.30(17)(b), Florida Statutes[,]
requires the court to consider all actual payments made to the
other parent for the benefit of the child"). That portion of the final
judgment reflecting an award of retroactive child support
accordingly is reversed. We remand the matter to the trial court to
indicate whether any amounts already paid by the former husband
for the benefit of the child during the retroactive child support
period were counted and to adjust that award if necessary.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
MORRIS, C.J., and VILLANTI and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
2 Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
CHRISTINE MARIE SHENOI v. RAVEEN SHENOI, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christine-marie-shenoi-v-raveen-shenoi-fladistctapp-2022.