Summary
The Sixth District Court of Appeal of Florida affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded an amended final judgment for arrearages arising from unpaid alimony-in-lieu payments. The court held that the trial court improperly relied on testimony based on a certified public accountant’s documents when the witness lacked an independent recollection of the payment amounts, and that the resulting prejudgment-interest calculation was unsupported by competent, substantial evidence. The court directed the trial court to enter a second amended final judgment removing the prejudgment-interest award.
Holdings
- A witness may not use a writing to refresh recollection when the witness has no independent recollection of the fact at issue; testimony based solely on such a document is not admissible as refreshed-recollection testimony.
- A trial court may not calculate prejudgment interest using testimony that is inadmissible hearsay and not based on personal knowledge; the factual findings underlying the calculation must be supported by competent, substantial evidence.
- The party seeking prejudgment interest bears the burden of proving the payment amounts and due dates necessary for the calculation; the opposing party is not required to present rebuttal evidence when the claimant has offered no competent evidence.
- When the record contains no competent, substantial evidence supporting a prejudgment-interest award, the award must be reversed without remand for taking additional evidence.
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion by permitting Joleen to testify about annual payment amounts based on CPA-prepared documents when she had no independent recollection of those amounts.
- Whether the trial court could rely on that testimony as competent, substantial evidence to calculate prejudgment interest.
- Whether the prejudgment-interest award should be reversed without remand for additional evidence.
- Whether the remaining issues raised by David warranted reversal.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (22)
- Morris v. State, 233 So. 3d 438, 446 (Fla. 2018)(followed)
- Cochran v. State, 411 So. 3d 1278, 1280 (Fla. 6th DCA 2025)(followed)
- Hudson v. State, 992 So. 2d 96, 107 (Fla. 2008)(followed)
- Reimbursement Recovery, Inc. v. Indian River Mem'l Hosp., Inc., 22 So. 3d 679, 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)(followed)
- Gainesville Health Care Ctr., Inc. v. Weston, 857 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)(followed)
- Schuenzel v. Schuenzel, 320 So. 3d 214, 216-17 (Fla. 2021)(followed)
- Catalfumo v. Catalfumo, 704 So. 2d 1095, 1100 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)(followed)
- Genser v. Reef Condo. Ass'n, 100 So. 3d 760, 762 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)(followed)
- Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212, 215 (Fla. 1985)(followed)
- Capitol Env't Servs., Inc. v. Earth Tech, Inc., 25 So. 3d 593, 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 22.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.