Opinion
No. 1D20-6
02-12-2021
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE and Julia Maria Clemons, Appellants, v. Aviance Calon MCMULLEN, Appellee.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Toni C. Bernstein, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellants. Aviance Calon McMullen, pro se, Appellee.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Toni C. Bernstein, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellants.
Aviance Calon McMullen, pro se, Appellee.
Per Curiam.
The Department of Revenue (DOR) appeals the final order of support entered by the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Because the ALJ gave the father credit for the child support payments he was not actually paying, we must reverse.
During the hearing, the father testified that he was not paying his court-ordered child support for his two older children. He stated that he stopped paying the child support because he was concerned that he would need money to pay the child support for the parties' child. He did not believe that he could afford to pay both child support orders and support himself. The father promised the ALJ that he would begin repaying his prior court-ordered support and catch up on the payments he missed. Even though the ALJ did not provide the father with credit for the payments he had missed, the ALJ deducted the prior court-ordered child support from the father's net income when he calculated the father's current child support payments.
Section 61.30(3)(f), Florida Statutes (2019), states that court-ordered child support payments actually made may be deducted from a party's net income. Because the ALJ made the legal determination that this statutory deduction applied, the standard of review is de novo . See Finney v. Finney , 995 So. 2d 579, 581 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (de novo standard of review applies when determining whether the trial court complied with the statutory child support guidelines).
This Court has previously said that until and unless a party pays the court-ordered child support for another child, he is not allowed to receive a deduction from his net income in accordance with section 61.30(3)(f). Robbins v. Kerns , 45 Fla. L. Weekly D2763a (Fla. 1st DCA Dec. 10, 2020) (holding child support not actually paid cannot be deducted from gross income in calculating child support for a different child or children, and noting that an equitable adjustment can be made in the tribunal's discretion). The father unequivocally stated that he stopped paying his child support because he was concerned about his current support obligation. Even though the father promised the ALJ that he would restart his child support payments, section 61.30(3)(f) does not contemplate a deduction for prospective support payments. Accordingly, we reverse and remand the case to the ALJ to reconfigure the parties' child support obligation in accordance with this opinion. REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.
Roberts, Rowe, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.