Valdes v. Valdes

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Valdes v. Valdes

6 So. 3d 731, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 6262, 2009 WL 1035004

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 20, 2009

Docket1D08-3887

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 6 So. 3d 731 (Valdes v. Valdes) 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

Valdes v. Valdes, 6 So. 3d 731, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 6262, 2009 WL 1035004 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The former wife appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We reverse the child support award. If a trial court does not articulate findings regarding the actual or adjusted income of the parties, this Court cannot determine whether a child support award is within the guidelines. We remand for the trial judge to calculate the child support in accordance with the statutory guidelines set forth in section 61.30, Florida Statutes. See Smith v. Smith, 996 So.2d 924, 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). The remaining issues on appeal are affirmed without further discussion.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

HAWKES, C.J., LEWIS, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The former wife appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We reverse the child support award. If a trial court does not articulate findings regarding the actual or adjusted income of the parties, this Court cannot determine whether a child support award is within the guidelines. We remand for the trial judge to calculate the child support in accordance with the statutory guidelines set forth in section 61.30, Florida Statutes. See Smith v. Smith, 996 So.2d 924, 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). The remaining issues on appeal are affirmed without further discussion.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

HAWKES, C.J., LEWIS, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 So. 3d 731, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 6262, 2009 WL 1035004, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valdes-v-valdes-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack