DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

KARVOILL K. WILLIAMS,

Appellant,

v.

ROOSDELE BOSSICOT a/k/a ROOSEDELE BOSSICOT,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-524

[July 8, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Scott I. Suskauer, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2019-DR000385-XXXX-NB.

Tasha M. Simmonds of The Law Firm of Ayo & Iken, PLC, 

Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Craig A. Boudreau of Boudreau Law, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

DAMOORGIAN, J.

Karvoill K. Williams (“Father”) appeals the trial court’s final judgment 

of determination of paternity, time-sharing, and child support. After 

considering the several issues raised by Father, we hold that the trial 

court’s child support award failed to take into account the substantial 

amount of time-sharing awarded to Father. We affirm without further 

comment the other issues raised by Father.

Father and Roosdele Bossicot (“Mother”) were involved in a romantic 

relationship which produced one child. Mother resides in Florida with the 

child, and Father resides in North Carolina. Mother filed a petition to 

determine paternity, a time-sharing schedule, and an award of child 

support.

Following a non-jury trial, the trial court entered a written final 

judgment of determination of paternity. The final judgment also contained 

a parenting plan which established the following time-sharing schedule for 

Father:
2

a. Thanksgiving. In odd-numbered years, the entire 

Thanksgiving Break commencing from the end of school 

until 6:00 p.m. the night before the resumption of school.

b. Christmas. In even-numbered years, Winter Break from 

the last day of school until two days before the 

recommencement of school.

c. Summer. In even-numbered years from the Sunday after 

the end of school until 6:00 p.m. ten days before the start 

of the school year.

d. Spring Break. Every from the end of school until 6:00 p.m. 

on the day before the resumption of school.

e. Floating weekends. Father shall be entitled to weekend 

timesharing from the end of school until 4:00 p.m. 

(6:00 p.m. if Father is exercising timesharing in South 

Florida or returning child to Mother’s residence) the night 

before the resumption of school in the months of February, 

April, September, November in even-numbered years, and 

December in odd-numbered years. November and 

December weekend timesharing cannot interfere with 

Thanksgiving or Winter Break.

Based on the amount of time-sharing awarded to Father, the trial court 

made a finding that the child spends a substantial amount of time with 

both parents: 23% with Father and 77% with Mother. Finally, Father was 

ordered to pay child support in the amount of $750 per month.

Father argues that the trial court’s award of child support fails to take 

into account its own finding that Father has a substantial amount of timesharing with the child. Accordingly, the child support amount should be 

reduced because Father will be caring for the child’s needs when the child 

is with him. We agree.

“A child support determination is within the sound discretion of the 

trial court, subject to the statutory guidelines and the reasonableness 

test.” Ondrejack v. Ondrejack, 839 So. 2d 867, 871 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). 

Furthermore, “a trial court’s decisions about support must be supported 

by competent substantial evidence and factual findings sufficient to enable 

this court to determine how the trial court made the decisions it did.” 

Lennon v. Lennon, 264 So. 3d 1084, 1085 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019). However, 

“[w]hether a trial court’s mathematical computations are correct is a 
3

question of law which is reviewed de novo.” Kareff v. Kareff, 943 So. 2d 

890, 892 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

For purposes of adjusting an award of child support, a noncustodial 

parent exercises a “substantial amount of time” when he or she exercises

time-sharing at least 20% of the overnights of the year. § 61.30(11)(b)8., 

Fla. Stat. (2019). “Where a child spends a substantial amount of time with 

the noncustodial parent under a timesharing arrangement, a reduction in 

that parent’s child support obligation is mandated.” Dillion v. Dep’t of

Revenue, Child Support Enf’t Program, 189 So. 3d 353, 354 (Fla. 4th DCA 

2016); see also § 61.30(11)(b), Fla. Stat. (2019). This method of calculating 

child support is referred to as the “gross-up method.” Rodriguez v. Medero, 

17 So. 3d 867, 871 n.1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009).

Here, the trial court correctly calculated the child support amount to 

be $750 per month before any consideration that the parties exercise a 

substantial amount of time-sharing with the child. However, the trial 

court failed to take the next step and apply the gross-up method. 

See § 61.30(11)(b), Fla. Stat. (2019); Dillion, 189 So. 3d at 354. Based on 

the time-sharing schedule, Father clearly spends more than 20% of 

overnights in even-numbered years but less than 20% of overnights in 

odd-numbered years. This requires a reduction in the child support owed 

in even-numbered years.

Based on the foregoing, we remand with instructions for the trial court 

to recalculate the child support award and take into consideration the 

substantial amount of time Father spends with the child in the 

even-numbered years. Because the child support award will differ between 

even and odd-numbered years, on remand, the trial court may order an 

award that averages the two figures. See Lopez v. Lopez, 994 So. 2d 374, 

375–76 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (holding that the trial court did not abuse its 

discretion when it ordered an averaged amount of child support when the 

father’s time-sharing with the children changed every year); see also

§ 61.30(11)(a)11., Fla. Stat. (2019) (providing that a court may make any 

other adjustment to the total minimum child support “that is needed to 

achieve an equitable result”).

Affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.

LEVINE, C.J., and FORST, J., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.