Opinion

Department of Revenue and Porshaun Walker v. Michael Eady Brown

  • 243 So. 3d 526
Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Filed
Apr 20, 2018
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 4.3%

The opinion

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-2671

_____________________________

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE and

PORSHAUN WALKER,

Appellants,

v.

MICHAEL EADY BROWN,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Division of Administrative Hearings.

J.D. Parrish, Judge.

April 20, 2018

PER CURIAM.

As the result of a request from the Nevada Child Support

Enforcement Program to determine paternity and support for

minor child Z.W., the Florida Department of Revenue (the

“Department”) initiated the present paternity action.

On January 20, 2017, the Department served Appellee,

Z.W.’s putative father, with a Notice of Administrative

Proceeding to Establish Paternity pursuant to section

409.256(4)(a)7.b., Florida Statutes. In April 2017, Appellee

received the results of a DNA test establishing that he was Z.W.’s

father.

A hearing was held on the Department’s Proposed

Administrative Paternity and Support Order, where the

Department requested that Appellee be required to pay

retroactive child support for the period beginning twenty-four

months before Appellee was served with notice of the paternity

proceeding, the maximum amount allowed by section 61.30(17),

Florida Statutes. The Division of Administrative Hearings issued

a final support order on June 22, 2017, finding the minor child

had a need for support and Appellee had the ability to pay, and

ordering, inter alia, that Appellee pay retroactive support from

April 1, 2017 through June 30, 2017, based on the date Appellee

received notice of the DNA test results establishing his paternity

of Z.W.

However, “the service date of the notice of paternity

proceeding . . . should be the operative date for administrative

proceedings in which the Department uses the bifurcated

procedure in section 409.256(4).” Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Sorto v.

LaGree, 106 So. 3d 534, 537 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). “Section

61.30(17), as well, supports using the service date of the notice of

paternity proceeding to determine the retroactive period.” Id. at

536.

Here, the Department served Appellee with a Notice of

Administrative Proceeding to Establish Paternity pursuant to

section 409.256(4)(a)7.b., Florida Statutes, on January 20, 2017.

Therefore, the order should have calculated retroactive support

based on the service date of the paternity proceeding, not the

date that Appellee was given notice of the DNA test results.

We reverse the final order and remand for a recalculation of

retroactive child support based on the date that Appellee was

served with notice of the paternity action.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

B.L. THOMAS, C.J., and LEWIS and MAKAR, JJ., concur.

2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or

9.331.

_____________________________

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee; Carrie R.

McNair, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Child Support

Enforcement, Tallahassee, for Appellant Department of Revenue.

No appearance for Appellee.

3

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.