#Family #Law, #Divorce, and #Child #Support #Paternity #TimeSharing #Lawyer for #Men in #Tampa #Florida

#Family #Law, #Divorce, and #Child #Support #Paternity #TimeSharing #Lawyer for #Men in #Tampa #Florida 

BASIC CHILD SUPPORT PRINCIPLES

INCOME FOR CHILD SUPPORT 

What is Income? - Section 61.30(2)(a), Florida Statutes

Bonuses, Commissions, Allowances, Overtime, Tips and other similar payments – § 61.30(2)(a)2, Fla. Stat.

i. In setting child support, if bonuses are regular and continuous, it is an abuse of discretion to exclude them from consideration when making a child support award. Parry v. Parry, 933 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Otherwise, if a bonus is not recurring, it is error to include it as income. Cissel v. Cissel, 82 So. 3d 891 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). 

? Trial court should have considered bonuses as income where the husband received regular and continuous bonuses nine (9) out of the thirteen (13) years he had been employed and had received bonuses for six (6) continuous years prior to dissolution. DiNardo v. DiNardo, 82 So. 3d 1102, 1106 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). 

? Trial court erred in failing to include bonus in income for child support purposes where husband received $7,000-$9,000 every year since 2009. Edge v. Edge, 196 So. 3d 448 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). 

? Where former husband included bonus as part of his net income on financial affidavit submitted into evidence and failed to object to its inclusion in income, bonus was properly included in income, and former husband’s remedy was through modification proceeding. McGlynn v. Tallman-McGlynn, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D741, 187 So. 3d 939 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). 

? Trial court was required to include bonus income in its calculations for child support, even though the bonuses were discretionary with the employer and based upon gross profits, where former husband received bonuses the preceding nine years. Drew v. Drew, 27 So. 3d 802 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). 

? Former husband’s extraordinary income in 2012 was not regular or continuous where it was due to a specific non-recurring event, i.e., the 2012 presidential election. Rudnick v. Harman, 162 So. 3d 116, 117 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). 

ii. The trial court should set the payor’s payment schedule for alimony and child support so that payments coincide with receipt of bonus income. See e.g. Coyne v. Coyne, 505 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (former husband’s payments should have been quarterly where he received significant bonus income quarterly); Shrove v. Shrove, 724 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). 

iii. Fourth DCA remanded case to trial court to recalculate income and child support where trial court miscalculated annualization of year-to-date income less a one-time bonus. Henry v. Henry, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D1184, 191 So. 3d 995 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).

John G. DeGirolamo, Esq.

In Law We Trust, P.A.

Law Offices of John DeGirolamo, Esq.

813-415-3510

https://inlawwetrust.com/child-custody-tampa/

Divorce, Family, and Criminal Litigation

Member: National Trial Lawyers Assoc.

Top 40 Under 40 Trial Lawyers of Florida Rated as a Florida Super Lawyer 

Be Prepared For Better Results!