Dean v. Dean

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dean v. Dean

503 So. 2d 439, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 696, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7131

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 4, 1987

DocketNo. 4-86-2621

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 503 So. 2d 439 (Dean v. Dean) 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

Dean v. Dean, 503 So. 2d 439, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 696, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7131 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court’s order of modification because we believe it was error for the court to reduce the already modest child support of $50.00 per week for a three-year-old agreed to in 1976 to $35.00 per week for a now thirteen-year-old child. It is undisputed on the record that the father’s income has gone from $22,-000.00 in 1976 to $35,000.00 in 1985 and that the needs of the child have increased. We reject the father’s claim that he is entitled to a reduction because he has remarried and now has three additional children to support. His remarriage does not constitute a valid basis for avoiding his previous obligation of support.

HERSEY, C.J., and ANSTEAD and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court’s order of modification because we believe it was error for the court to reduce the already modest child support of $50.00 per week for a three-year-old agreed to in 1976 to $35.00 per week for a now thirteen-year-old child. It is undisputed on the record that the father’s income has gone from $22,-000.00 in 1976 to $35,000.00 in 1985 and that the needs of the child have increased. We reject the father’s claim that he is entitled to a reduction because he has remarried and now has three additional children to support. His remarriage does not constitute a valid basis for avoiding his previous obligation of support.

HERSEY, C.J., and ANSTEAD and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

503 So. 2d 439, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 696, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dean-v-dean-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack