Court Opinion

ID: 9374032
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-22 16:13:50.849666+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:44.321185
License: Public Domain

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
                              FOURTH DISTRICT

                       HECTOR J. TORRES RIOS,
                             Appellant,

                                      v.

                             REBECA ARIAS,
                                Appellee.

                              No. 4D22-2412

                            [February 22, 2023]

  Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm
Beach  County;    Maxine    Cheesman,       Judge;   L.T.    Case    No.
502021DR003549.

   Dirk Lorenzen of Lorenzen Law, Coral Gables, for appellant.

    Michael S. Dyer of Law Office Michael Samuel Dyer, West Palm Beach,
for appellee.

KUNTZ, J.

    Hector Torres Rios filed a Petition to Establish Paternity and for Related
Relief. Rebeca Arias filed a proposed parenting plan after a court-ordered
paternity test established Torres’ paternity. Following a bench trial, the
trial court granted Torres’ motion to establish paternity and largely
adopted Arias’ proposed parenting plan. It also denied Torres’ petition to
change the child’s surname. Torres appeals several portions of the Final
Judgment and incorporated Parenting Plan. We affirm without discussion
several of the issues Torres raises on appeal. But on five other issues we
reverse and remand as explained below.

   First, we agree with Torres that the final judgment and incorporated
parenting plan conflict on several points. So we reverse those portions of
the final judgment and remand to the trial court for clarification. A.A. v.
D.W., 326 So. 3d 1186, 1187 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021).

     Second, section 61.13(2)(b)3.a., Florida Statutes (2022), provides that
“[i]f the court orders shared parental responsibility over health care
decisions, the parenting plan must provide that either parent may consent
to mental health treatment for the child.” The final judgment did not
include this required provision. We reverse the final judgment to allow the
trial court to amend the judgment to comply with this statute.

   Third, the final judgment states the parties must pay “all child related
expenses” on a pro rata share, “including but not limited, uncovered
medical, dental, prescriptions, optometry, cost of education, daycare,
aftercare, summer camp, and tutoring.” It orders Torres to pay 96% of
such expenses and Arias to pay 4%. But, as Torres argues, no pleading
asked the trial court for an award of expenses beyond child support. So
we reverse the trial court’s award of expenses that were not properly before
the court.

   Fourth, the evidence established that health insurance coverage for the
child is provided through Torres’ medical insurance plan. But the final
judgment concluded the child is and will remain on Medicaid. We reverse
that portion of the final judgment and remand for the trial court to correct
the judgment.

     Fifth, section 382.013(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2022), states that “[i]f the
paternity of the child is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction .
. . the name of the father and the surname of the child shall be entered on
the certificate in accordance with the finding and order of the court.”
Further, “[i]f the court fails to specify a surname for the child, the surname
shall be entered in accordance with subsection (3).” Id. Subsection (3)
states that if the mother and father disagree on the surname, “the surname
selected by the father and the surname selected by the mother shall both
be entered on the birth certificate, separated by a hyphen, with the
selected names entered in alphabetical order.” § 382.013(3)(b), Fla. Stat.
(2022). We agree with Torres that the court erred when it denied his
request to include his surname on the child’s birth certificate. So we
reverse and remand for the entry of an amended final judgment that
complies with section 382.013.

   For the reasons stated above, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and
remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

   Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

                             *         *          *

    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                                       2