Feagle v. Feagle

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Feagle v. Feagle

696 So. 2d 959, 1997 WL 395258

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 16, 1997·No. No. 96-4215·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court ordered appellant to provide dental and health insurance for the minor child; however, there is no record evidence indicating that such insurance is reasonably available to appellant as that term is defined in section 61.13(l)(b), Fla. Stat. Therefore, we REVERSE that portion of the final dissolution order and REMAND for reconsideration of the issue. See, e.g., Carlton v. Carlton, 599 So.2d 213 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Rosen v. Rosen, 655 So.2d 153 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1995); Dehler v. Dehler, 648 So.2d 819 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). The trial court may take further evidence as necessary to determine the reasonable availability of health insurance. The order is AFFIRMED in all other respects.

BOOTH, JOANOS and WOLF, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court ordered appellant to provide dental and health insurance for the minor child; however, there is no record evidence indicating that such insurance is reasonably available to appellant as that term is defined in section 61.13(l)(b), Fla. Stat. Therefore, we REVERSE that portion of the final dissolution order and REMAND for reconsideration of the issue. See, e.g., Carlton v. Carlton, 599 So.2d 213 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Rosen v. Rosen, 655 So.2d 153 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1995); Dehler v. Dehler, 648 So.2d 819 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). The trial court may take further evidence as necessary to determine the reasonable availability of health insurance. The order is AFFIRMED in all other respects.

BOOTH, JOANOS and WOLF, JJ., concur.

Feagle v. Feagle, 696 So. 2d 959, 1997 WL 395258 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

696 So. 2d 959 (Feagle v. Feagle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related