JACK E. HOOPER, APPELLANT,
v.
LINDA SUZANNE HOOPER, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Temporary Child Support cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Jack E. Hooper appeals a nonfinal order increasing the amount of temporary child support which he is required to pay and argues that the trial court failed to consider and awarded temporary support in excess of the child support guidelines set forth in section 61.30, Florida Statutes (1995). We have jurisdiction to review this nonfinal order. See, Fla. R.App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iii); Garcia v. Garcia, 560 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). Although there may be evidentiary support for the trial court’s decision to increase Hooper’s child support obligation, we are compelled to reverse because the trial court’s order does not set forth specific findings as to the parties’ income, the basis for the modified support amount, or any justification for the departure from the guidelines. § 61.30(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1995); Jones v. Jones, 636 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); see also, Hardy v. Hardy, 659 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
REVERSED and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
BOOTH, WOLF and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Christa Adkins v. Sotolongo, 197 So. 3d 1233 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…he trial court’s order does not set forth specific statutory findings as to the parties’ income, the basis for the modified support amount, or any justification for a departure from the guidelines. § 61.30(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1995); Hooper v. Hooper, 681 So. 2d 833, 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Jones v. Jones, 636 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); see also, Hardy v. Hardy, 659 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Wilcox v. Munoz, 35 So. 3d 136, 139 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (holding the failure to include findings regarding th…
-
Scribner v. Danese Scribner, 702 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…w the amounts of child support and arrearage were calculated and whether these amounts constituted a departure from the child support guidelines. Under these circumstances, it is impossible to conduct adequate appellate review. See Hooper v. Hooper, 681 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). We, therefore, reverse and remand for further proceedings on the issue of child support and arrearage. In all other respects, the order of dissolution is affirmed. JOANOS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Jones v. Jones, 636 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Garcia v. Sailly Garcia, 560 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Ira Glynn Hardy v. Loretta Vesta (Powell) Hardy, 659 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)