Court Opinion

ID: 9913998
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-29 14:02:26.549459+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:09:48.014350
License: Public Domain

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
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).

                                  2
       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.
               _____________________________

                                3