NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
C.J.I.-R., )
)
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Case No. 2D16-1577
)
C.M., )
)
Appellee. )
___________________________________ )
Opinion filed April 19, 2017.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for
Hillsborough County; Wesley D. Tibbals,
Judge.
Arthur C. Fulmer, Jr., of Fulmer &
Fulmer, P.A., Lakeland (withdrew after
briefing), for Appellant.
C.J.I.-R., pro se.
C.M., pro se.
SILBERMAN, Judge.
C.J.I.-R. (the Father) and C.M. (the Mother) are the parents of a daughter
born in 2012. The Father appeals a second amended final judgment1 that establishes
1
The Father appealed an amended final judgment, but during the
pendency of this appeal this court relinquished jurisdiction to allow the trial court to
paternity, a parenting plan, and child support. The Father raises several issues, only
one of which warrants discussion. We reverse and remand solely for the trial court to
calculate child support using the correct net income for the Father. We affirm in all
other respects.
In determining child support, a trial court's finding regarding a party's
income must be supported by competent substantial evidence. Hoffman v. Hoffman, 98
So. 3d 196, 197 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); McCants v. McCants, 984 So. 2d 678, 682 (Fla. 2d
DCA 2008). Here, at the final hearing the Father testified that the Mother's Exhibit 2, his
financial affidavit filed February 11, 2016, was an accurate reflection of his current
income. He did not testify to any specific amounts of income or deductions, and the
Mother's counsel did not challenge him on any of the amounts listed. The Father's
financial affidavit entered into evidence shows a monthly tax liability of $575.07 and a
net monthly income of $2466.93. But the worksheet attached to the second amended
final judgment shows the Father's monthly tax liability as $468.59, resulting in a net
monthly income of $2573.41.
Thus, the worksheet the trial court used deviated from the evidence and
overstated the Father's net income by $106.48 per month. Therefore, the net income of
$2573.41 for the Father that the trial court used to calculate child support is not
supported by competent substantial evidence. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for
the trial court to recalculate child support using the Father's net income of $2466.93
correct a date in the amended final judgment, and the trial court rendered a second
amended final judgment.
-2-
shown on his financial affidavit. Otherwise, we affirm the second amended final
judgment.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
MORRIS and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
-3-