Posey v. Posey

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Posey v. Posey

493 So. 2d 41, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1756, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9267

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 12, 1986

DocketNo. BM-458

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 493 So. 2d 41 (Posey v. Posey) 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

Posey v. Posey, 493 So. 2d 41, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1756, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9267 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

ZEHMER, Judge.

We affirm the order finding appellant delinquent in paying child support pursuant to the final judgment of September 28, 1983, which incorporated the parties’ agreement regarding custody of the two children and the amount of child support payments. The effect of that judgment was to require payment of forty dollars per week for the two children staying with the wife under the agreed custody arrangement until modified by the trial court upon motion and showing of reasonable grounds therefor. No attempt was made by appellant to seek modification of the order before he ceased making payments on the asserted ground that one or both children were not staying with appellee during the weeks covered by the payments. We do not accept appellant’s construction of the settlement agreement, and find no error in the trial court’s ruling that the obligation to pay was not conditioned upon appellant’s determination that the child was not physically residing with appellee during each week for which payments were to be made.

The appealed order sets forth a reasonable resolution of the problem raised by the mother’s motion to enforce child support payments which was well within the scope of discretion accorded trial judges in these circumstances. The order is, therefore,

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

ZEHMER, Judge.

We affirm the order finding appellant delinquent in paying child support pursuant to the final judgment of September 28, 1983, which incorporated the parties’ agreement regarding custody of the two children and the amount of child support payments. The effect of that judgment was to require payment of forty dollars per week for the two children staying with the wife under the agreed custody arrangement until modified by the trial court upon motion and showing of reasonable grounds therefor. No attempt was made by appellant to seek modification of the order before he ceased making payments on the asserted ground that one or both children were not staying with appellee during the weeks covered by the payments. We do not accept appellant’s construction of the settlement agreement, and find no error in the trial court’s ruling that the obligation to pay was not conditioned upon appellant’s determination that the child was not physically residing with appellee during each week for which payments were to be made.

The appealed order sets forth a reasonable resolution of the problem raised by the mother’s motion to enforce child support payments which was well within the scope of discretion accorded trial judges in these circumstances. The order is, therefore,

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

493 So. 2d 41, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1756, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9267, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/posey-v-posey-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack