Hauser v. Hauser

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hauser v. Hauser

778 So. 2d 309, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13222, 2000 WL 1508393

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 12, 2000

DocketNo. 1D00-1186

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 778 So. 2d 309 (Hauser v. Hauser) 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

Hauser v. Hauser, 778 So. 2d 309, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13222, 2000 WL 1508393 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order requiring the husband to pay temporary child support. We have jurisdiction. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.180(a)(8)(C)(iii). Because the trial court failed to apply the child support guidelines, section 61.30, Florida Statutes, we reverse and remand the case for further findings as to the proper amount of temporary support. See Finley v. Scott, 707 So.2d 1112 (Fla.1998). The child support guidelines apply to temporary support orders as well as support orders entered after final hearings. See Burkhart v. Burkhart, 620 So.2d 225 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). On remand, the trial court may, once again, order the husband to pay temporary child support from his assets, but only if the court finds that his recurrent income including interest and dividends is insufficient to meet the needs of the children. See Sotoloff v. Sotoloff, 745 So.2d 959 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Dyer v. Dyer, 658 So.2d 148 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995).

Reversed.

BOOTH, ALLEN and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order requiring the husband to pay temporary child support. We have jurisdiction. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.180(a)(8)(C)(iii). Because the trial court failed to apply the child support guidelines, section 61.30, Florida Statutes, we reverse and remand the case for further findings as to the proper amount of temporary support. See Finley v. Scott, 707 So.2d 1112 (Fla.1998). The child support guidelines apply to temporary support orders as well as support orders entered after final hearings. See Burkhart v. Burkhart, 620 So.2d 225 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). On remand, the trial court may, once again, order the husband to pay temporary child support from his assets, but only if the court finds that his recurrent income including interest and dividends is insufficient to meet the needs of the children. See Sotoloff v. Sotoloff, 745 So.2d 959 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Dyer v. Dyer, 658 So.2d 148 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995).

Reversed.

BOOTH, ALLEN and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

778 So. 2d 309, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13222, 2000 WL 1508393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hauser-v-hauser-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack