Hunter v. Hunter, 77-456
| Decision Date | 16 May 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 77-456,77-456 |
| Citation | 359 So.2d 500 |
| Parties | Betty Ann HUNTER, Appellant, v. Howard HUNTER, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
William F. Sullivan, Pompano Beach, for appellant.
William Zei of Gibbs & Itkin, P. A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a ruling that a New York support judgment was not entitled to be recognized by Florida in its full amount.
While the parties were married but separated and resided in New York the Family Court there entered an order which, after modification, provided support of $100 per week for the plaintiff-wife and $50 per week for each of two children. The defendant-appellee-husband moved to Florida and fell into arrears on his support obligation. The wife commenced a support enforcement action under the New York "Uniform Support of Dependents Law" and Florida, as responding state, accepted the proceeding under § 88.181, Fla.Stat. (1971), of the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Law, URESA. Jurisdiction was obtained over the husband and by order dated June 8, 1971, he was required to pay $50 per week support for both children.
The husband then sued in Florida for dissolution of the marriage and obtained constructive service of process. The wife did not appear. The final judgment, dated November 29, 1971, dissolved the marriage and required child support in accordance with the URESA support order of June 8, 1971.
Thereafter the Family Court in New York, in an action in which the husband personally appeared with counsel, determined the arrearage under the original New York support order to be $11,600 and on January 16, 1974, entered a support judgment in that amount. This determination gave the husband credit for all payments made under the Florida URESA order and included the additional child support and support for the wife accruing both before and after the Florida dissolution of marriage. When the wife sued in Florida to localize or domesticate the New York support judgment the trial court held that the New York judgment of January 16, 1974, was entitled to recognition in Florida but only in the amount that had accrued under the original New York support order prior to the dissolution of November 29, 1971. The wife appeals.
We agree with both the lower court and the New York court that the Florida URESA order did not in any manner modify or supersede the prior New York order of support but that amounts paid under the URESA order were to be credited against the sums accrued or accruing under the prior foreign support order. See § 88.281, Fla.Stat. (1971).
The husband argued below, and the trial court apparently agreed, that the New York statute upon which the original support order was based relates to a "husband's" duty to support a "wife" and that after the Florida dissolution the parties were no longer husband and wife and, therefore, the New York court in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mouzon v. Mouzon
...28 A.L.R.2d 1358, reh. den., 47 So.2d 546 (Fla.1950), cert. den., 340 U.S. 866, 71 S.Ct. 90, 95 L.Ed. 632 (1950); Hunter v. Hunter, 359 So.2d 500 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978), rev. den., 365 So.2d 712 (Fla.1978).8 See Palmer v. Palmer, 353 So.2d 1271 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Rosen v. Rosen, 306 So.2d 54......
-
Weiss v. Weiss
...also apply the divisibility principle where the divorce decree was obtained from a foreign jurisdiction. Hunter v. Hunter, 359 So.2d 500 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1978); Wallace v. Wallace, 290 Md. 265, 429 A.2d 232 (1981); Healey v. Healey, 152 N.J.Super. 44, 377 A.2d 762 (1977); Noel v. Noel, 15 N......
- Bankston v. Brennan
-
Chapman v. Lamm, 79-1550
...by publication will not support an order for contempt for failure to pay support contained in the final judgment. See Hunter v. Hunter, 359 So.2d 500 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Palmer v. Palmer, 353 So.2d 1271 (Fla.1st DCA 1978); and Carnes v. Carnes, 256 So.2d 550 (Fla.4th DCA 1972). It is sugge......