Pearson v. Pearson

790 So. 2d 1264, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 11365, 2001 WL 908660
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 10, 2001
DocketNo. 5D00-3530
StatusPublished

This text of 790 So. 2d 1264 (Pearson v. Pearson) 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
Pearson v. Pearson, 790 So. 2d 1264, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 11365, 2001 WL 908660 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

PLEUS, J.

We affirm the six-page final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We write only to address the husband’s argument that the order requiring him to pay 75% of the children’s uncovered medical, dental and ocular expenses be limited by the terms [1265]*1265“reasonable and necessary.” It is implicit in the court’s judgment that the expenses be reasonable and necessary. Patterson v. Cuervo, 683 So.2d 205, 206 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). Additionally, the husband should not be responsible to pay for non-covered elective procedures without express agreement between the parties or by order of the court. See Schellhammer v. Schellhammer, 687 So.2d 987 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997).

AFFIRMED.

SAWAYA and PALMER, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Patterson v. Cuervo
683 So. 2d 205 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Schellhammer v. Schellhammer
687 So. 2d 987 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
790 So. 2d 1264, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 11365, 2001 WL 908660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pearson-v-pearson-fladistctapp-2001.