Quinn v. Quinn
Decision Date | 10 July 2015 |
Docket Number | No. 2D14–3306.,2D14–3306. |
Citation | 169 So.3d 268 |
Parties | Mark QUINN, Appellant, v. Stoyna QUINN, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Mark Quinn, pro se.
Ingrid Anderson, Clearwater, for Appellee.
Mark Quinn, the former husband, appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, raising objections to the calculation of child support and the equitable distribution scheme. We find no merit in Mr. Quinn's arguments regarding equitable distribution, the calculation of Ms. Quinn's income, or the amount of child support arrearages owed by Mr. Quinn. However, an error on the face of the judgment requires reversal as to the child support calculation.
In this case, the parties failed to arrange for a recording of the trial and our record contains neither a transcript nor a stipulated statement in lieu of the transcript.1 Thus, our review is limited to errors that occur on the face of the final judgment. See Wilcox v. Munoz, 35 So.3d 136, 139 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).
This court has stated that Esaw v. Esaw, 965 So.2d 1261, 1264–65 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (citation omitted). In Esaw, the final judgment of dissolution of marriage lacked findings of fact required to support the alimony award and equitable distribution scheme. Id. at 1264. We were constrained to affirm the final judgment because the appellant failed to provide a transcript of the trial or a stipulated statement, and she thus failed to demonstrate harmful error. Id. at 1265.
Wilcox, 35 So.3d at 138 ( ); see C.J.E. v. S.D.A., 79 So.3d 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) ( ).
Mr. Quinn argues that the child support award is erroneous because it is not calculated based on the number of overnights the children will spend with him pursuant to the parenting plan, resulting in an increased amount of support owed by him. When a parenting plan provides that the children will spend a “substantial amount of time” with each parent, defined as at least twenty percent of the overnights per year, the award of child support should be adjusted as set forth in section 61.30(11)(b), Florida Statutes (2013), requiring calculation based in part on the percentage of overnights the children spend with each parent. § 61.30(11)(b). The statute presumptively establishes the amount of child support the court should award in each case. See § 61.30(1)(a).
§ 61.30(11)(b)(7) ; see also § 61.30(11)(a) ; Smith v. Smith, 45 So.3d 928, 930 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (). If the trial court wishes to deviate from the presumptive amount by more than five percent, the final judgment must include findings of fact to support the deviation and “explain why the guidelines amount is unjust or inappropriate.” Wilcox, 35 So.3d at 139 (citing § 61.30(1)(a) ); see also Pridgeon v. Pridgeon, 632 So.2d 257, 260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Hurley v. Lifsey
- Ervans v. City of Venice
-
McGill v. McGill
... ... evidence, we limit our review to errors on the face of the ... judgment. Quinn v. Quinn, 169 So.3d 268, 269 (Fla ... 2d DCA 2015) ... Section ... 61.30, Florida Statutes (2021), provides ... ...
-
McGill v. McGill
...of the final hearing or a statement of evidence, we limit our review to errors on the face of the judgment. Quinn v. Quinn , 169 So. 3d 268, 269 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). Section 61.30, Florida Statutes (2021), provides guidelines for the award of child support and retroactive child support. The ......