HECTOR IZQUIERDO
v.
MARINE IGLESIAS

Fla. 3d DCA | 2026-02-11
No. 2025-0017
2026 FL 1473 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2026) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

In this paternity and child support appeal, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment establishing paternity, a parenting plan, and timesharing schedule, but reversed and remanded on two issues: the trial court's failure to describe communication methods and technologies between parents and child as required by statute, and mathematical/factual errors in the child support calculation that were inconsistent with the timesharing percentages awarded.

Holding

The court affirmed the judgment in all respects except for two discrete issues: (1) the judgment's failure to describe the methods and technologies for parent-child communication must be corrected as required by Florida Statute § 61.13(2)(b)(4), and (2) the child support calculation must be recalculated because it contained mathematical and factual errors inconsistent with both the worksheet and the timesharing percentages awarded.

Headnotes

[1] A final judgment establishing a parenting plan and timesharing schedule must describe the methods and technologies parents will use to communicate with the child.

[2] A child support award may be reversed if it contravenes the monthly net income reflected on the child support guidelines worksheet attached to the judgment.

Previewing 2 of 4 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
Key Quotes

“[d]escribe . . . the methods and technologies that the parents will use to communicate with the child”

Statutory requirement from Fla. Stat. § 61.13(2)(b)(4) that the trial court must include in its judgment, which was missing from the judgment and formed the basis for reversal on this issue.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence
Facts & Procedural History

Hector Izquierdo, the father, appealed from a final judgment of paternity that established a parenting plan, timesharing schedule (27% for the father)…

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.

Topics
Child Support Guidelines Worksheet Time-Sharing Schedule Parenting Plan Net Income

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Child Support Guidelines Worksheet cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

MILLER, J. Appellant, Hector Izquierdo, the father, appeals from a final judgment of paternity establishing a parenting plan and timesharing schedule and awarding child support. We have jurisdiction. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A).

The father raises a myriad of issues on appeal. Appellee, Marine Iglesias, the mother, commendably concedes the judgment impermissibly fails to “[d]escribe . . . the methods and technologies that the parents will use to communicate with the child.” See § 61.13(2)(b)(4), Fla. Stat. (2024).

We summarily affirm in all other respects, save the support calculation because it contravenes the monthly net income reflected on the child support guidelines worksheet attached to the judgment and is inconsistent with the percentage of timesharing awarded to the respective parties.¹ See Campbell v. Jara, 392 So. 3d 1104, 1106 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024) (reversing "child support award due to mathematical and factual errors"); Skelly v. Skelly, 300 So. 3d 342, 345 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020) (reversing where use of "worksheet is inconsistent with the child support awarded by the court in its final judgment”); see also Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence

Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.

Footnotes
1 The father's timesharing award equates to 27%. or by an alternative theory.”); Fla. Fam. L. R. P. 12.530(a) (“To preserve for appeal a challenge to the failure of the trial court to make required findings of fact in the final judgment, a party must raise that issue in a motion for rehearing under this rule."). Accordingly, we reverse and remand only as to these two discrete issues.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Izquierdo v. Marine Iglesias (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)
    …t calculation because it contravenes the monthly net income reflected on the child support guidelines worksheet attached to the judgment and is inconsistent with the percentage of timesharing awarded to the respective parties.¹ See Campbell v. Jara, 392 So. 3d 1104, 1106 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024) (reversing "child support award due to mathematical and factual errors"); Skelly v. Skelly, 300 So. 3d 342, 345 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020) (reversing where use of "worksheet is inconsistent with the child support awarded by the cou…
    1 / 2

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw