Gilbert v. Cole

107 So. 3d 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) · District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District · May 18, 2012

Summary

The Florida appellate court held that the child support provision in the parties’ divorce decree created an allocated award, notwithstanding the later mediation agreement modifying the monthly amount. The court reversed the arrearage judgment and remanded for recalculation of arrears, including a retroactive reduction based on the older child’s emancipation.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Writing for the Court
Thomas, J.; Benton, C.J.; Swanson, J.
Jurisdiction
Florida
Decision date
May 18, 2012
Procedural posture
Former husband appealed a judgment for child-support arrearages.
Standard of review
De novo review applies to interpretation of a marital settlement agreement because it is a contract.
Precedential value
published opinion
Parties
Former husband v. Former wife
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

child supportdissolution of marriagecontract interpretationappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

family lawchild supportcontractsappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the original divorce decree or the later mediation agreement controlled the characterization of the child-support award.
  2. Whether the child-support provision constituted an allocated award under which the former husband's obligation for each child ended upon that child's emancipation.
  3. Whether the former husband was entitled to a retroactive reduction of support and recalculation of arrearages dating from the older child's emancipation rather than only from the filing of the modification petition.

Holdings

  1. The original divorce decree controlled the characterization of the child-support award because the mediation agreement modified only the monthly amount of support and did not otherwise alter the decree's support provision.
  2. The decree created an allocated child-support award, with one-half of the stated amount attributable to each child and the obligation ending separately when each child was emancipated as defined by the decree.
  3. Because the award was allocated, the former husband was entitled to a reduction of his support obligation retroactive to the older child's emancipation, as defined by the decree, and the trial court had to recalculate the arrearages accordingly.

Key quotations

A marital settlement agreement is a contract subject to interpretation like any other contract, (107 So. 3d at 427)
We hold that the child support award here is an allocated award entitling Appellant to a reduction of his support obligation, retroactive to the date of the parties’ oldest child’s emancipation, as defined by the divorce decree. (107 So. 3d at 428)

Factual background

The parties' final dissolution judgment required the former husband to pay $8,500 per month in child support for their two children, with the obligation continuing for each child under specified emancipation conditions. The parties later entered a court-approved mediated settlement agreement reducing the monthly obligation to $2,625. The older child turned eighteen in November 2008 and graduated from high school in June 2009, after which the former husband disputed the amount of arrearages while acknowledging that arrears existed.

Procedural history

The trial court determined that the child-support award in the final dissolution judgment and subsequent consent order was unallocated and calculated arrearages for the older child through the date the former husband filed a modification petition. The former husband appealed, arguing that the original decree created an allocated award and that his obligation for the older child ended upon emancipation.

Remand instructions

Recalculate the former husband's child-support arrearages consistently with the holding that the award was allocated and that his obligation was reduced retroactively to the older child's emancipation as defined by the divorce decree.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…