Rowe v. Rodriguez-Schmidt

51 So. 3d 1238, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 187, 2011 WL 148815
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 19, 2011
Docket2D10-487
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 51 So. 3d 1238 (Rowe v. Rodriguez-Schmidt) 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
Rowe v. Rodriguez-Schmidt, 51 So. 3d 1238, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 187, 2011 WL 148815 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

Jose Rodriguez-Schmidt filed a postdis-solution petition seeking to reduce the child support he pays Michelle Rowe and to modify his obligation to pay the unreim-bursed medical expenses of the parties’ child. The circuit court granted the petition, and Ms. Rowe has appealed on numerous grounds. We affirm without discussion on all her points save one. 1

We reverse the circuit court’s determination that each party should be responsible for half of the child’s unreimbursed medical expenses. If such noncovered expenses are not factored into the child support guidelines calculation, and they were not in this case, responsibility for the expenses should be apportioned based on the parties’ relative incomes. See Wilcox v. Munoz, 35 So.3d 136, 141 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Martinez v. Martinez, 911 So.2d 288, 289-90 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Mr. Rodriguez-Schmidt’s income is greater than his former wife’s. We reverse and remand with directions to recalculate the parties’ responsibility for the child’s unreimbursed medical expenses based on their relative incomes.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

DAVIS and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
1

. Mr. Rodriguez-Schmidt also asked the court to award him the income tax deduction for his son. The court did so, but Ms. Rowe does not challenge that decision on appeal.

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

Related

Tummings v. Francois
82 So. 3d 955 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 So. 3d 1238, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 187, 2011 WL 148815, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowe-v-rodriguez-schmidt-fladistctapp-2011.