Snyder v. Linville

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Snyder v. Linville

659 So. 2d 1373, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 9435, 1995 WL 527219

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 8, 1995

DocketNo. 94-02834

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 659 So. 2d 1373 (Snyder v. Linville) 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

Snyder v. Linville, 659 So. 2d 1373, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 9435, 1995 WL 527219 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

BLUE, Judge.

Marty Snyder appeals the order granting her petition for an increase in child support for the parties’ minor child. We agree with her contention that the trial court erred by failing to make the increase retroactive to the date the petition was filed. The record shows that the need for increased child support and the father’s ability to pay existed on that date. Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion by not making the increased support award retroactive. See Browne v. Browne, 569 So.2d 1378 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Additionally, the record shows that the father was in a substantially superi- or financial position to the mother. Therefore, the trial court erred by not awarding attorney’s fees to her. See § 742.045, Fla. Stat. (1993).

Accordingly, we affirm the order increasing the amount of child support but direct that the order be retroactive to the date the petition for increase was filed. We reverse the denial of attorney’s fees and direct the trial court to award reasonable fees to the mother.

THREADGILL, C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

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

BLUE, Judge.

Marty Snyder appeals the order granting her petition for an increase in child support for the parties’ minor child. We agree with her contention that the trial court erred by failing to make the increase retroactive to the date the petition was filed. The record shows that the need for increased child support and the father’s ability to pay existed on that date. Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion by not making the increased support award retroactive. See Browne v. Browne, 569 So.2d 1378 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Additionally, the record shows that the father was in a substantially superi- or financial position to the mother. Therefore, the trial court erred by not awarding attorney’s fees to her. See § 742.045, Fla. Stat. (1993).

Accordingly, we affirm the order increasing the amount of child support but direct that the order be retroactive to the date the petition for increase was filed. We reverse the denial of attorney’s fees and direct the trial court to award reasonable fees to the mother.

THREADGILL, C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

659 So. 2d 1373, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 9435, 1995 WL 527219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snyder-v-linville-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack