Department of Revenue v. Annis, ___ So. 3d ___, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D565 (Fla. 2d DCA March 4, 2015)
The Department of Revenue (DOR) filed a petition for support against the father. The trial court’s amended final judgment imputed income at the median income level, but a successor judge relied upon Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(a) to enter a second amended final judgment that reduced the imputation of income to the minimum wage level. The appellate court reversed. Rule 1.540(a) may be used to correct clerical, but not substantive, errors. “The successor judge’s findings . . . indicate[d] that she believed that the median wage level imputation of income was the result of a mistaken view of the facts or law and that there had been a due process violation at the hearing on DOR’s motion to vacate. But those types of errors are judicial errors that must be addressed by appeal and not by rule 1.540(a). Consequently, because the trial court lacked jurisdiction under rule 1.540(a) to reduce the imputation of income on these facts, it committed fundamental error when it vacated the amended final judgment of support and entered the second amended final judgment of modification to correct error.” A clerical error does not occur when the mistake is the product of a deliberate choice.
To read more briefs in the Family Law category of the Kashi Law Letter, please click here, http://www.kashilawletter.com/category/family-law/.
To read more briefs in the Civil Procedure: Judgment category of the Kashi Law Letter, please click here, http://www.kashilawletter.com/category/civil-procedure/judgment/.
To read more briefs in the Civil Procedure: Florida Rules of Civil Procedure category of the Kashi Law Letter, please click here, http://www.kashilawletter.com/category/civil-procedure/florida-rules-of-civil-procedure/.