Furman v. Furman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Furman v. Furman

707 So. 2d 1183, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2884, 1998 WL 130925

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 25, 1998

DocketNo. 97-01523

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 707 So. 2d 1183 (Furman v. Furman) 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

Furman v. Furman, 707 So. 2d 1183, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2884, 1998 WL 130925 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

DOYEL, ROBERT L., Associate Judge.

The appellant wife raises a number of issues in this appeal from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. Only two merit discussion, and the appellee husband concedes error in both instances. The trial court awarded sole parental responsibility of the couple’s child to the husband, and the record does not support such an award. Furthermore, counsel for the husband pointed out that the husband did not ask for an award of sole parental responsibility. Similarly, although the trial court found that there was no basis for finding that the wife owed any arrearage in child support, the court inexplicably ordered the wife to pay $10 per week against her arrearage.

The final judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded to the trial court with instructions to strike from the final judgment the $10 weekly child support arrearage payment and to enter an order awarding the parties shared parental responsibility. In all other respects the final judgment is affirmed.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.

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

DOYEL, ROBERT L., Associate Judge.

The appellant wife raises a number of issues in this appeal from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. Only two merit discussion, and the appellee husband concedes error in both instances. The trial court awarded sole parental responsibility of the couple’s child to the husband, and the record does not support such an award. Furthermore, counsel for the husband pointed out that the husband did not ask for an award of sole parental responsibility. Similarly, although the trial court found that there was no basis for finding that the wife owed any arrearage in child support, the court inexplicably ordered the wife to pay $10 per week against her arrearage.

The final judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded to the trial court with instructions to strike from the final judgment the $10 weekly child support arrearage payment and to enter an order awarding the parties shared parental responsibility. In all other respects the final judgment is affirmed.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

707 So. 2d 1183, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2884, 1998 WL 130925, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/furman-v-furman-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack