Trang Ngoan Le v. Tung Phuong Nguyen
Decision Date | 06 July 2012 |
Docket Number | No. 5D10–4338.,5D10–4338. |
Citation | 98 So.3d 600 |
Parties | TRANG NGOAN LE, Appellant, v. TUNG PHUONG NGUYEN, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Jeffrey A. Conner, Winter Garden, for Appellant.
No Appearance for Appellee.
Trang Ngoan Le, the former wife, appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage that incorporated the provisions of a marital settlement agreement (MSA) and parenting plan entered into with Tung Phuong Nguyen, the former husband. On appeal, the former wife argues that the court should have set aside the MSA and parenting plan. We affirm in all respects, except as to the parenting plan.
The parties were married in 2004 and have two minor children. In January 2010, the former wife filed a pro se petition for dissolution of the parties' marriage. Simultaneously, she filed the parties' executed financial affidavits, as well the MSA and a parenting plan in which they waived spousal support, agreed on the distribution of marital assets, and provided that they would share time with the two children equally, on a rotating weekly basis, and thus, waived child support.1
Prior to entry of the final judgment, the former wife filed a motion to set aside the MSA and parenting plan, alleging that the MSA was invalid and unenforceable because (1) it was reached based on fraud and misrepresentation; (2) it was unfair and grossly unreasonable; and (3) the former husband did not accurately disclose his income and assets. As to the parenting plan, the former wife alleged that it was no longer in the children's best interests to reside with the former husband every other week because he has an anger management problem and has been physically abusive to her in the children's presence. She further claimed that the children fear that the former husband could be physically abusive toward them. We affirm, without discussion, the trial court's refusal to set aside the MSA, except as it relates to the parenting plan for the minor children.
The former wife correctly contends that the trial court erred by not considering whether the parenting plan was in the children's best interests, and instead, requiring that she meet the high burden of proving a substantial change of circumstances. A court is not bound by an agreement of parents regarding child support, custody, or visitation. Higgins v. Higgins, 945 So.2d 593, 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). As our sister court stated: Lane v. Lane, 599 So.2d 218, 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); see Feliciano v. Feliciano, 674 So.2d 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) ( ). Inste...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Puglisi v. Puglisi, 5D12–2572.
...that “[a] court is not bound by an agreement of parents regarding child support, custody, or visitation.” Trang Ngoan Le v. Tung Phuong Nguyen, 98 So.3d 600, 601 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012); see also Lane v. Lane, 599 So.2d 218, 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (“It is undisputed, and should be indisputable......
-
Pagliaro v. Pagliaro, 4D18-702
..., 100 So.2d 639 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958) ; Bolton v. Gordon , 201 So.2d 754 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967) ); see also Trang Ngoan Le v. Tung Phuong Nguyen , 98 So.3d 600, 601 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012).Similarly, in Wayno v. Wayno , 756 So.2d 1024 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), the Fifth District held that the circuit cou......
-
Alternative dispute resolution and settlement
...and child support may be set aside if deemed by court to not be in child’s best interests); Trang Ngoan Le v. Tun Phoung Nguyen , 98 So.3d 600 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (trial court was required to consider the best interests of the child before approving an agreed Parenting Plan); Mancuso v. Man......