KATHLEEN MOLLY CHATTIN, A/K/A MOLLY KATHLEEN CHATTIN, APPELLANT,
v.
MORRIS R. CHATTIN, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court reversed a trial court's modification order requiring the wife to pay child support, holding that increased income alone does not establish increased ability to pay without evidence that expenses have not proportionally increased.
Increased income alone does not justify modification of child support obligations without competent substantial evidence of increased ability to pay after accounting for increased expenses.
[1] A modification of child support based on increased income requires competent substantial evidence that the obligor's ability to pay has increased, not merely that gross i…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“While the wife's income may have increased since the time dissolution was granted, the trial court made no finding that this increase in income also evidenced an increased ability to pay child support.”
Court explaining the trial court's error in basing modification solely on income increase without considering ability to pay
The wife's income increased from zero at the time of dissolution to $836.67 at the time of modification, but her monthly expenses exceeded her income …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Ability To Pay Child Support cases and more on FLexlaw
SANDERLIN, Judge.
In this appeal the wife challenges an order of the trial court which granted the husband’s motion for modification of final judgment of dissolution of marriage, and which required the wife to pay $60.20 per month per child in child support. We reverse.
In its order, the trial court found that the wife’s income had increased from zero, at the time the final judgment of dissolution was entered, to $836.67, at the time modification was sought, and that this was a significant change requiring her to contribute to child support in the form of monthly payments of $60.20 for each child. While the wife’s income may have increased since the time dissolution was granted, the trial court made no finding that this increase in income also evidenced an increased ability to pay child support. The record before us clearly reflects that while the wife’s income may have increased, so too have her expenses to the extent that her monthly expenses exceed her income by more than $400. Because there is no competent substantial evidence of the wife’s increased ability to pay child support, the trial court’s order is reversed. See Diaco v. Diaco, 363 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). The husband, of course, can file a new motion for any necessary assistance in meeting the needs of the children, if and when the wife’s financial situation improves. See Scheuter v. Scheuter, 408 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).
SCHEB, A.C.J., and HALL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Diaco v. Diaco, 363 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- Scheuter v. Scheuter, 408 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
- State v. Parent, 408 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)