CHRISTINE MARIE SHENOI
v.
RAVEEN SHENOI
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.
A trial court awarding retroactive child support must consider and account for all actual payments already made by the obligor for the benefit of the child.
[1] In calculating retroactive child support, a trial court must consider and account for all actual payments already made by the obligor for the benefit of the child during…
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 intelligence“Section 61.30(17)(b), Florida Statutes[,] requires the court to consider all actual payments made to the other parent for the benefit of the child”
Court citing Carter v. Carter, 294 So. 3d 384, 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020)
Christine Marie Shenoi and Raveen Shenoi were former spouses in a dissolution proceeding. The trial court entered a final judgment of dissolution and …
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 Calculation cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
CHRISTINE MARIE SHENOI, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. RAVEEN SHENOI, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. No. 2D21-1537 September 2, 2022 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Cynthia J. Newton, Judge. Ingrid Anderson, Clearwater, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Jane H. Grossman, St. Petersburg, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal brought by the former wife and cross-appeal brought by the former husband challenging the final judgment of dissolution and the amendment thereto entered following a partial
2 grant of a motion for rehearing. We affirm the final judgment of dissolution without further comment with one exception. There is not a sufficient basis for this court to determine whether the retroactive child support awarded included appropriate consideration by the trial court of any amounts already paid for the benefit of the child. See § 61.30(17)(b), Fla. Stat. (2020); Carter v. Carter, 294 So. 3d 384, 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (finding error where mortgage payments that were already paid for the benefit of the child were not calculated into the retroactive child support obligation and stating that "[s]ection 61.30(17)(b), Florida Statutes[,] requires the court to consider all actual payments made to the other parent for the benefit of the child"). That portion of the final judgment reflecting an award of retroactive child support accordingly is reversed. We remand the matter to the trial court to indicate whether any amounts already paid by the former husband for the benefit of the child during the retroactive child support period were counted and to adjust that award if necessary. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. MORRIS, C.J., and VILLANTI and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
3 Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.