JACQUELINE MORRIS-PIARD, APPELLANT,
v.
EGIDE PIARD, 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.
The appellate court reviewed a lower court's order modifying child support and setting arrearages. The court affirmed most of the order but reversed the prejudgment interest calculation on a specific period of child support payments.
Yes, the circuit court erred. The prejudgment interest rate applicable to the October through December 2011 payments should have been the statutory rate of 4.75% that became effective on October 1, 2011, not the prior 6% rate.
[1] Prejudgment interest on child support payments is calculated using the statutory judgment interest rate in effect on the date the payments become due and owing.
[2] The statutory judgment interest rate for prejudgment interest purposes is applied from the date of entitlement to the payments.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Courts apply the statutory judgment interest rate from the date of loss or entitlement under section 55.03 for purposes of calculation of [prejudgment] interest.”
Establishes the principle for applying statutory interest rates.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe former wife appealed the circuit court's order regarding child support modification and arrearages. A key issue was the prejudgment interest rate …
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 Arrearages cases and more on FLexlaw
Jacqueline Morris-Piard (the former wife) appeals the order granting her petition for modification of her child support obligation and the order setting the amount of her child support arrearage and awarding that amount to Egide Piard (the former husband). The former wife raises two issues on appeal; we write only to address her argument that the circuit court erred in calculating the prejudgment interest award on the support payments she owed between October and December *6572011. We affirm the order on appeal in all other respects.
The former wife argues that the court improperly assessed a rate of 6% interest for the dependent Social Security Disability Insurance payments she owed between October and December 2011. The former wife correctly points out that Florida’s Chief Financial Officer decreased the judgment interest rate from 6% to 4.75% pursuant to section 55.03, Florida Statutes (2011), effective on October 1, 2011. “Courts apply the statutory judgment interest rate from the date of loss or entitlement under section 55.03 for purposes of calculation of [prejudgment] interest.” Genser v. Reef Condo. Ass’n, 100 So.3d 760, 762 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (emphasis added). The former husband was not entitled to the support payments until they became due and owing on a monthly basis. See Cortina v. Lorie, 95 So.3d 467, 468 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (“Child support obligations vest at the time payments are due.”). Thus, the prejudgment interest applicable to the former wife’s October through December 2011 payments was the 4.75% rate that went into effect on October 1, 2011. As such, the trial court erred in awarding 6% prejudgment interest on those payments. See Allstate Floridian Ins. Co. v. Farmer, 104 So.3d 1242, 1250-51 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012).
Accordingly we reverse only the trial court’s calculation of the prejudgment interest award and remand for the trial court to enter a corrected total consistent with this opinion.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.
SILBERMAN and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Allstate Floridian Ins. Co. v. Farmer, 104 So. 3d 1242 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)
- Genser v. The Reef Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 100 So. 3d 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)
- Cortina v. Lorie, 95 So. 3d 467 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)
- McCRAY v. State, 95 So. 3d 467 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)