UBANGI E.S. HAJJ-MAK, APPELLANT,
v.
RENEE I. SPENCER, 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 affirmed an order directing the Department of Revenue to release lottery winnings to satisfy child support arrearages, rejecting the appellant's due process challenge as unpreserved and finding statutory authority for prioritizing child support debt over lottery prize payments.
A trial court may direct the Department of Revenue to release lottery winnings to satisfy child support arrearages under Florida Statutes section 24.115, which prioritizes child support debt over direct payment to the prize winner.
[1] Florida Statutes section 24.115 provides that payment of an outstanding child support debt takes priority over payment directly to the lottery prize winner.
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 intelligenceHajj-Mak won $5,000 in lottery winnings but owed $8,280 in child support arrearages to his former wife. The trial court held a hearing on March 29, 19…
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 Enforcement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ubangi E.S. Hajj-Mak appeals an order directing the Department of Revenue to release his $5,000 in lottery winnings to his former wife in partial payment of child support arrearages of $8,280. He complains that the lottery funds were released to his former wife without a hearing and in violation of due process. The order from which Hajj-Mak appeals, however, indicates that a hearing did take place on March 29, 1999, prior to the funds being released to the former wife. Further, at this hearing in which Hajj-Mak participated, he did not raise the due process argument he attempts to raise here for the first time on appeal. E.g., Archer v. State, 613 So. 2d 446 (Fla.1993) (for an issue to be preserved for appeal, it must be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved). We also note that the trial court scheduled a hearing to allow Hajj-Mak to present his “complaint [that] the income deduction order resulted] in too much being deducted for child support,” but that Hajj-Mak elected instead to bring this appeal.
Lastly, section 24.115, Florida Statutes (1999), specifically provides that payment of an outstanding child support debt takes priority over a payment directly to the prize winner. Accordingly, the trial court’s order is