Khuzam v. Khuzam

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Khuzam v. Khuzam

689 So. 2d 1170, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 1870, 1997 WL 91450

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 5, 1997

DocketNo. 96-784

StatusPublished

This text of 689 So. 2d 1170 (Khuzam v. Khuzam) 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

Khuzam v. Khuzam, 689 So. 2d 1170, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 1870, 1997 WL 91450 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

On Rehearing

PER CURIAM.

We grant the former husband, Mamdouh Khuzam’s, motion for rehearing and substitute the opinion filed on December 26, 1996, with the following opinion.

The former husband appeals the final judgment of dissolution of marriage alleging that the trial court erred in calculating the wife’s child support obligation where each party has primary residential custody for one of their children. We find, as the wife properly concedes, that the trial court erred by calculating child support based on the minimum guidelines support for one child, instead of two. Therefore, we reverse and remand that portion of the final judgment for a recalculation of the parties’ child support obligations in accordance with the child support guidelines and the trial court’s findings.

The husband’s other points on appeal, namely, that the trial court erred by imputing income to him and by denying his request for alimony, do not merit discussion.

Affirmed, in part; reversed, in part, and remanded.

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

On Rehearing

PER CURIAM.

We grant the former husband, Mamdouh Khuzam’s, motion for rehearing and substitute the opinion filed on December 26, 1996, with the following opinion.

The former husband appeals the final judgment of dissolution of marriage alleging that the trial court erred in calculating the wife’s child support obligation where each party has primary residential custody for one of their children. We find, as the wife properly concedes, that the trial court erred by calculating child support based on the minimum guidelines support for one child, instead of two. Therefore, we reverse and remand that portion of the final judgment for a recalculation of the parties’ child support obligations in accordance with the child support guidelines and the trial court’s findings.

The husband’s other points on appeal, namely, that the trial court erred by imputing income to him and by denying his request for alimony, do not merit discussion.

Affirmed, in part; reversed, in part, and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

689 So. 2d 1170, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 1870, 1997 WL 91450, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/khuzam-v-khuzam-fladistctapp-1997.