Case Name: Rafael ANAYA, Appellant, v. Ileana ANAYA, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1992-01-07
Citations: 591 So. 2d 1125
Docket Number: No. 91-1862
Parties: Rafael ANAYA, Appellant, v. Ileana ANAYA, Appellee.
Judges: Before HUBBART, COPE and GERSTEN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 591
Pages: 1125–1125

Head Matter:
Rafael ANAYA, Appellant, v. Ileana ANAYA, Appellee.
No. 91-1862.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Jan. 7, 1992.
Rehearing Denied Feb. 11, 1992.
Scherman and Zelonker, and Regina F. Zelonker, Hiáleah, for appellant.
Beth Tyler Vogelsang, Miami, for appel-lee.
Before HUBBART, COPE and GERSTEN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Rafael Anaya (husband), appeals from a final judgment awarding child support. We affirm.
Husband contends that the trial court erred because it did not strictly apply the statutory guideline method of determining child support. In Todesco v. Todesco, 583 So.2d 774 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) the court stated:
Additionally, child support guidelines, while helpful, are not to be automatically applied; the court should consider both the needs of the child and the overall financial circumstances of the parties. Hillman v. Hillman, 567 So.2d 1066 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Huff v. Huff, 556 So.2d 537 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
In this case, because the trial judge considered the needs of the child and the financial circumstances of the parties, we affirm the award of child support.
Further, the wife filed for temporary child support and was entitled to the retroactive award of child support. See Gutierrez v. Gutierrez, 554 So.2d 589 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
Affirmed.