FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D22-1433

LT Case No. 2003-DR-000332

_____________________________

MYRIELLE LEMOINE, 

Appellant,

v.

KEVIN L. JACKSON, SR, 

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Seminole County. 

Michael J. Rudisill, Judge. 

Sara Howeller, of Law Office of Sara Howeller, Sanford, 

for Appellant. 

Kevin L. Jackson, Sr., Sanford, pro se.

December 29, 2023

WALLIS, J.

In this post-judgment paternity case, Myrielle Lemoine

(“Appellant”) appeals an order denying her motion to modify child 

support and granting Kevin Jackson (“Appellee”) motion to modify 

child support. Because competent, substantial, albeit conflicting 

evidence supported the trial court’s conclusion that Appellant’s 

underemployment was voluntary, we affirm the denial of 

Appellant’s modification request without further discussion. We 

also affirm, in part, the granting of Appellee’s modification request 
2 

based on the parties’ stipulation to a substantial change in the 

parties’ incomes. However, we reverse, in part, the trial court’s 

imputation of income to Appellant and remand for recalculation of 

child support. 

As the party seeking to impute income, Appellee has the 

burden to present competent, substantial evidence that:

a. The unemployment or underemployment is

voluntary; and

b. Identifies the amount and source of the imputed

income, through evidence of income from available

employment for which the party is suitably qualified

by education, experience, current licensure, or

geographic location, . . . .

§ 61.30(2)(b)1., Fla. Stat. (2022). Although Appellee presented

sufficient evidence that Appellant’s underemployment in 2014 was

voluntary, the trial court’s imputation of $160,000 in annual

income from her last child support payment in 2015 until

December 18, 2019, was based solely on her 2012 income. Appellee

failed to present any evidence of available employment at that

income level, for which Appellant was qualified, during the

imputation time period. See, e.g., Gillespie v. Holdsworth, 333 So.

3d 278, 281 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022) (reversing imputation of income to

former wife where former husband relied solely on evidence of

former wife’s work history); Jorgensen v. Tagarelli, 312 So. 3d 505,

507 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020) (“As the party seeking to impute income,

Former Husband bears the burden to show ‘both employability and

that jobs are available.’” (quoting Dottaviano v. Dottaviano, 170 So.

3d 98, 100 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015))). Accordingly, we reverse the

imputation of income to Appellant and remand for recalculation of

child support in accordance with section 61.30 for the period from

Appellant’s last payment of child support in 2015 until December

18, 2019. See, e.g., Piccinini v. Waxer, 321 So. 3d 943, 946 (Fla. 5th

DCA 2021) (reversing and remanding award of retroactive child

support for recalculation without imputation of income).
3 

Appellant’s remaining arguments regarding the calculation 

of child support and award of prejudgment interest were either not 

preserved for appeal or lack merit. 

AFFIRMED in part. REVERSED in part. REMANDED with

instructions.

EISNAUGLE and BOATWRIGHT, JJ., concur. 

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331. 

_____________________________