SEVERN RICHARD OMBRES, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
PAMELA VINES OMBRES, 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.
In this divorce case involving two ophthalmologists, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded the trial court's final judgment concerning property division and child support. The court held that goodwill should not be included in valuating a medical practice, and that the trial court improperly allocated child support without adequately considering the wife's substantial income.
The court held that goodwill cannot be included in the valuation of a medical practice. Additionally, when valuing patient records, only the value of a patient's continued treatment for a current eye problem should be considered, excluding goodwill for future appointments. Furthermore, child support allocation for parents with combined net incomes exceeding $50,000 must be determined through individual case-by-case review, considering each parent's proportionate contribution to combined net income, not solely the non-custodial parent's income.
[1] Goodwill should not be included in the valuation of a medical practice in dissolution proceedings.
[2] The valuation of patient records should only consider the value of a patient's continued treatment for a current condition, not future appointments.
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“We agree that it is improper to include goodwill in the valuation of a medical practice.”
Establishes the core holding that goodwill cannot be factored into professional practice valuations in divorce proceedings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSevern Richard Ombres, Jr. and Pamela Vines Ombres, both ophthalmologists, divorced after a fourteen-year marriage. They had two children together. Th…
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 Child Support Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
GARRETT, Judge.
The husband and wife, both ophthalmologists, stopped seeing eye to eye in their fourteen year marriage and got a divorce. The husband seeks review of the final judg ment which ordered him to pay child support and lump sum alimony, and the trial court’s inclusion of goodwill in its valuation of the couple’s professional association.
We agree that it is improper to include goodwill in the valuation of a medical practice. Moebus v. Moebus, 529 So. 2d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), rev. denied, 539 So. 2d 475 (Fla.1989) 1. We believe that the trial court’s valuation of “patient records” also included some goodwill for future appointments. Only the valué of a patient’s continued treatment for a current eye problem should be considered when valuing the records.
The husband was ordered to pay $4,736 each month as child support. The wife contributes about $500 a month to reach what she said is the amount needed to raise their two children. Although we recognize that child support guidelines do not “apply to parents with a combined net income in excess of $50,000 per year,” we likewise recognize “such persons shall be subject to child support orders based upon individual case by case review.” § 61.30(1), Fla.Stat. (1987). We believe that the share of the child support from parents with combined net incomes in excess of $50,000 should also be determined in part by comparing each parent’s net income to their combined net incomes. The trial judge did not take the wife’s near six figure yearly income into consideration when he ordered the husband to pay over ninety percent of the child support although the wife earned about thirty-five per cent of their combined net incomes. As noted by Chief Judge Hersey in Brotman v. Brotman, 528 So. 2d 550, 552 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988):
The most dominant and directly related factor to be considered in determining the amount of child support to be paid by the noncustodial parent is the income of that parent. Determination of the amount of child support rests primarily in the discretion of the trial judge considering factors such as needs of the children, their age, their station in life, and prior standard of living of the parents, relative to the financial status and ability of the non-custodial parent to meet such needs. The ability of the custodial spouse to provide for the needs of the children should also be taken into account.
(Citations omitted) (emphasis added).
We reverse and remand. The trial judge consistent with this opinion should revisit his plan for the equitable distribution of the parties’ marital assets and each parent’s share of child support.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
HERSEY, C.J., and WARNER, J., concur. . In Thompson v. Thompson, 546 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), this court certified the following question (the supreme court accepted jurisdiction and scheduled oral argument for March 8, 1990):
In marriage dissolution proceedings to which an owner of a professional association is a party may the value of the professional association’s good will be factored in determining the professional association’s value?
Unlike Doctors Ombres, only Mr. Thompson (an attorney) was a member of the professional association.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Yola Harrison v. Harrison, 573 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…ns shall be subject to child support orders based upon individual case by case review. (Emphasis added). See also Brandt v. Brandt, 565 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Hinshelwood v. Hinshelwood, 564 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Ombres v. Ombres, 564 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). In Ombres, the court construed the guidelines to mean that each parent’s share of child support when the combined net incomes exceed $50,000 should also be determined in part by comparing each parent’s net income to the combined…
-
Ombres v. Severn Richard Ombres, Jr., 596 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 1991)…McDonald, justice. We review Ombres v. Ombres, 564 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), because of conflict with Thompson v. Thompson, 576 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1991).* We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const. In this dissolution case the trial judge, among other things, sought to divide the marital assets eq…
-
Durden v. Hewitt, 582 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…1989), as is required to determine the proper support in cases involving incomes in excess of the guidelines amount. See Harrison v. Harrison, 573 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Brandt v. Brandt, 565 So. 2d 397 (Fla.2d DCA 1990); Ombres v. Ombres, 564 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment in all respects except as to the amount of the award of child support and remand the cause for further consideration of the appropriate amount of child support, past and future, and the amou…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Stroud v. Indus. Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 528 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Moebus v. Moebus, 529 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Thompson v. Tobitha Thompson, 546 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)