Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Randall v. Griffin
Citations: 204 So. 3d 965; 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17105Docket: 5D15-3683
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; November 6, 2016; Florida; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Marthell Randall appeals a contempt order against Willie Carl Griffin, Jr., contending the trial court failed to include enforcement conditions for the child support payment. The trial court's original 2010 order mandated Griffin to pay $59.32 weekly, but Randall claimed he was in arrears and sought civil contempt enforcement in 2015. During a July hearing, Griffin did not appear, and the hearing officer granted Randall's motion but omitted enforcement provisions. The trial court ratified this decision without mechanisms to ensure compliance. Randall filed a timely motion for rehearing requesting enforcement provisions, but the court deemed it untimely as it allegedly did not reach the clerk in time. The appellate court noted that issues not raised in briefs are typically abandoned unless they involve fundamental errors. It emphasized that fundamental error must equate to a denial of due process. The court clarified that the service date is critical for determining the timeliness of motions, referencing Florida rules and precedent. The appellate court reversed the trial court's order for further proceedings, indicating the need to address Randall's motion for rehearing regarding enforcement provisions. A timely motion for rehearing, served under Rule 1.530(b), requires the trial court to evaluate its merits. In the case of JPMorgan Chase Bank v. Bigley, the court emphasized that if a motion is timely filed, the trial court must consider it. The Appellant's motion was deemed timely as it was served within the stipulated fifteen days, thus necessitating the trial court's consideration of its merits. The court can address the issue despite the Appellant not raising it in her brief because the trial court's failure to review the motion constituted a denial of due process. A rule that dismisses a timely appeal due to clerical errors is inconsistent with justice. Consequently, the decision is reversed and remanded for the trial court to fully consider the Appellant’s request for enforcement provisions in the contempt and enforcement order. The trial court, while having discretion in implementing enforcement mechanisms for child support obligations, must evaluate alternatives for compliance once civil contempt is established. The record indicates the Appellee did not respond to the Appellant’s motions or attend the relevant hearing. On remand, the trial court must contemplate enforcement mechanisms and comply with Florida Family Law Rule 12.615(d) and section 61.14(5), Florida Statutes (2015), by documenting its findings and reasoning for the contempt ruling. The decision is reversed and remanded. Judges Torpy and Evander concur.