Divorce, Palm Beach Gardens, Substantial Time-Sharing Credit

In a divorce proceedings, a parent can waive the substantial time-sharing credit. In Emmenegger v. Emmenegger the Florida Court of Appeal recently stated that: “The provision at issue in the 2005 agreement specifically states that ‘[t]he parties[‘] visitation arrangements outlined herein will not be considered as the [f]ather[‘s] having 40% of time with the children.’ It is clear from the wording of the provision and the other provisions in the agreement relating to child support and visitation that the parties intended for the father’s visitation schedule to have no effect on the father’s child support obligations. In a divorce proceeding, a parent can waive the substantial time-sharing credit. “The provision at issue in the 2005 agreement specifically states that ‘[t]he parties[‘] visitation arrangements outlined herein will not be considered as the [f]ather[‘s] having 40% of time with the children.’ It is clear from the wording of the provision and the other provisions in the agreement relating to child support and visitation that the parties intended for the father’s visitation schedule to have no effect on the father’s child support obligations.

Specifically, the parties intended that the father would pay a specific amount of child support, that the father would receive 40% of the overnights with the children, and that the father would not receive the adjustment in his child support obligation that he would otherwise legally be entitled to under section 61.30(11)(b). The goal to be accomplished by the agreement was that the father would provide a particular amount of support for his children without consideration of his substantial time-sharing…Because the provision in the 2005 agreement clearly indicates the parties’ intention to not give the father a statutory adjustment in his child support based on his substantial time-sharing, the trial court erred in applying the adjustment in section 61.30(11)(b), absent some substantial change in circumstances that would justify overlooking the father’s earlier waiver of his right to that statutory reduction. See Knight v. Knight, 702 So. 2d 242, 243 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) …[T]he cases holding that the adjustment is mandatory do not involve a parent who expressly agreed to waive the right to have his child support adjusted. Cf, e.g., Migliore, 848 So. 2d 1250.”

To speak with a divorce lawyer in Palm Beach Gardens, FL, contact Matthew Lane & Associates, P.A. at (561) 651-7273.

Categories

Archives