RAYNESSA T. PARRIS
v.
AZARIAH B. ISRAEL
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 does not err in refusing to order postjudgment interest on retroactive child support when it finds there is no child support arrearage.
[1] Postjudgment interest on retroactive child support is not mandatory absent a finding of child support arrearage, but may be awarded when a child support delinquency becom…
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 intelligenceIn a dissolution of marriage case, the trial court ordered the former husband to pay retroactive child support to the former wife but declined to impo…
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
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We find no error in the trial court's refusal to order postjudgment interest on the retroactive child support ordered to be paid by Azariah Israel, the former husband, to Raynessa Parris, the former wife, where the trial court found that there is no child support arrearage. We note that this ruling does not preclude the award of postjudgment interest in the event a child support delinquency becomes a final judgment. See § 61.14(6)(d), Fla.
2
Stat. (2023) (providing that when a delinquency becomes "a final judgment by operation of law against the obligor," statutory interest shall be charged on the judgment).
Affirmed.
SLEET, C.J., and LaROSE and MORRIS, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.