State, Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. ex rel. Johnson v. Miller, 444 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). · Go Syfert
State, Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. ex rel. Johnson v. Miller, 444 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Cited for

No citing cases on record.

Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State of Florida, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, on Behalf of Gail Johnson
v.
George Miller
No. 83-1822.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Feb 10, 1984.
Published opinion
444 So. 2d 1157
1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11710
Geraldine H. Carlton of Carlton & Carlton, P.A., Lakeland, for appellant., No appearance for appellee.
Campbell, Lehan, Ott.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal of a modification of an ongoing child support obligation and a pri- or child support obligation.

In 1981, a judgment of paternity was entered against appellee, George Miller, and appellee was ordered to pay child support. A public assistance obligation and an arrearage for child support payments were determined in 1983. Subsequently, a petition for a rule to show cause why appellant was not in contempt for being in arrears was filed.

At the hearing on the petition to show cause, appellee verbally requested a modifi[*1158]cation of his child support obligation. The trial court found that appellee was not in willful contempt of court and ordered ap-pellee to pay $10 a week towards the ar-rearage and granted appellee’s request to reduce his regular child support payments. This appeal followed.

The lower court’s finding that appellee was not in contempt cannot be characterized as an abuse of discretion. However, we reverse the modification of the ongoing child support on the authority of Parmer v. Parmer, 431 So.2d 257 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Appellee did not file a petition for modification; the court may not modify a prior order of child support absent a pleading for modification. Parmer at 258.

For this reason, we reverse the modification of the child support, without prejudice, to a petition for modification of child support.

OTT, C.J., and CAMPBELL and LEHAN, JJ., concur.