Fausnight v. Teasdale

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fausnight v. Teasdale

803 So. 2d 800, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 17206, 2001 WL 1555554

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 7, 2001

DocketNo. 5D01-94

StatusPublished

This text of 803 So. 2d 800 (Fausnight v. Teasdale) 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

Fausnight v. Teasdale, 803 So. 2d 800, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 17206, 2001 WL 1555554 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PLEUS, J.

This case involves issues of custody and child support. The mother and father are not married to each other and apparently never had any intention of marrying each other. Initially the mother filed a paternity action. The father admitted paternity and the case was resolved in a mediated settlement agreement in which the mother was made the primary residential parent. The mother, however, never moved to have the agreement accepted by the trial court, and ultimately both parties became unhappy with the settlement and filed petitions to become the primary residential parent. In its final judgment, the trial court awarded primary custody to the father.

While we affirm the trial court’s final judgment as to the issues of child support and child custody, we reverse the final judgment as it pertains to the trial court’s attempted “forgiving” of the father’s child support arrearage. It is, as a rule, not appropriate to retroactively reduce child support obligations. Barr v. Barr, 724 So.2d 1200 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). By the time of the final hearing on this matter, the child support arrearage in this case had grown to $1,860.58.¹

Accordingly, the final judgment in this case is affirmed with the exception that the mother is awarded the arrearage amount of $1,860.58.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

COBB and ORFINGER, R.B., JJ., concur.

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

PLEUS, J.

This case involves issues of custody and child support. The mother and father are not married to each other and apparently never had any intention of marrying each other. Initially the mother filed a paternity action. The father admitted paternity and the case was resolved in a mediated settlement agreement in which the mother was made the primary residential parent. The mother, however, never moved to have the agreement accepted by the trial court, and ultimately both parties became unhappy with the settlement and filed petitions to become the primary residential parent. In its final judgment, the trial court awarded primary custody to the father.

While we affirm the trial court’s final judgment as to the issues of child support and child custody, we reverse the final judgment as it pertains to the trial court’s attempted “forgiving” of the father’s child support arrearage. It is, as a rule, not appropriate to retroactively reduce child support obligations. Barr v. Barr, 724 So.2d 1200 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). By the time of the final hearing on this matter, the child support arrearage in this case had grown to $1,860.58.¹

Accordingly, the final judgment in this case is affirmed with the exception that the mother is awarded the arrearage amount of $1,860.58.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

COBB and ORFINGER, R.B., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

803 So. 2d 800, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 17206, 2001 WL 1555554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fausnight-v-teasdale-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack