The First District Court, in an opinion issued yesterday in Dept. of Revenue v. Collingwood and Gray reversing the lower tribunal's ruling that the Department of Revenue was prohibited from representing a father seeking modification of support based on the father's unclean hands due to child support arrears. The Mother below, a former DOR client, had asked for disqualification of the D.O.R. based on conflict of interest. The Court granted the motion, but on the grounds that the father was in arrears and "it would be inequitable to allow the department to represent him against the mother, and that the department's efforts should be directed at enforcement of the existing support order." The First District first explained that there was no conflict, as the DOR's counsel represents the department and not either parent. As to the child support arrears, the Court of Appeal found that the statutory requirement of a review of child support obligations every three years and modification if appropriate is not linked to whether the payor is current in support payments.
Use the largest online attorney directory to quickly find detailed profiles of Florida lawyers and law firms in your area.
Đăng ký:
Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)
Bài đăng phổ biến
-
Sheesh, does anyone have any news of any interest? Does it count that I saw Ervin rockin' some hard-core aviators outside the courthous...
-
I don't know, I feel like we're getting a little Frank Jimenez chronic here, and yet more news keeps breaking. Now it's this , i...
-
stucomplaint I'm still on a high from last night's Bar thingy, so...
-
11th Circuit, 11th Schmircuit, that's what I always say. And I see I'm not alone. On Friday in the closely-watched Checking Overdraf...
-
That old W.C. Fields line is ringing in my head, as the wind kicks up and rip tides batter the coast. I have to be honest, with the emerging...
-
Here's an interesting opinion from Magistrate Judge Torres awarding defendants attorney's fees for opposing a copyright infringemen...
-
Here is the Senate Judiciary Committee agenda (there was a live webcast too). From a well-placed source: He finished – no hard questions- ...
-
In the very long saga of Fort Lauderdale attorney Robert Ingham 's doomed representation of MCS against Essent Healthcare, Judge Seitz ...
-
Hi folks, lots of fun stories floating around today. First, as anyone working at a big firm knows, conflicts checks are a real hassle. Just ...
-
Federal Rule Violation If you have been charged with USCA0024 FEDERAL RULE VIOLATION you can call a Defense Attorney Tampa at 1-877-793-9290...
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét