MELANIE DUFOUR v. ERNEST DAMIANI
17-0656
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Dec 13, 2017Background
- Parties divorced; marital settlement agreement (incorporated into final judgment) gave Wife exclusive use and possession of marital home with the children and required the parties to equally share the mortgage and reasonable maintenance costs until sale or refinance. If anyone other than Wife and the children resided in the home, Husband’s obligation to pay half the mortgage would be suspended.
- Wife lived in the home with the children; she paid her mother money and claimed her mother as a dependent on her 2014 tax return.
- Husband stopped paying half the mortgage, arguing his obligation ended when Wife claimed her mother as a dependent (citing IRS rules about claiming a dependent and providing more than half the cost of a home).
- A magistrate found Wife did not prove she provided more than half of the mother’s living expenses for a full year and suggested Wife had committed tax fraud; the magistrate also held that non-support property obligations cannot be enforced by contempt.
- Trial court denied Wife’s motion for contempt; Wife appealed. The Fourth District reversed, holding the mortgage obligation here was an aspect of support and thus enforceable by contempt, and that the settlement agreement did not permit suspension of the obligation based solely on Wife’s tax filing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Dufour) | Defendant's Argument (Damiani) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Husband’s obligation to pay half the mortgage is an aspect of support enforceable by contempt | Mortgage payments tied to Wife’s exclusive use and possession for her and the children are an aspect of child support in kind; contempt is available for enforcement | Mortgage obligation is property settlement/debt, not support; contempt cannot be used to enforce property obligations | Court held mortgage obligation was an aspect of support (child support in kind) and thus enforceable by contempt |
| Whether Husband’s obligation terminated when Wife claimed her mother as a dependent | Wife’s tax filing does not trigger suspension under the agreement; agreement only suspends obligation if another person actually resides in the home | Husband contended obligation suspended upon Wife claiming her mother as dependent (arguing IRS rules imply dependency even if parent didn’t live with Wife) | Court rejected Husband’s termination argument — the agreement required actual occupancy to suspend payments; tax filing alone did not relieve him |
Key Cases Cited
- Whelan v. Whelan, 736 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (contempt improper to enforce non-support debts)
- Sency v. Sency, 478 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (exclusive possession for spouse and children constitutes child support in kind)
- Douglas v. Douglas, 616 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (mortgage obligations tied to exclusive possession may be in the nature of child support and enforceable despite unrelated breaches)
- Burke v. Burke, 336 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976) (property settlement obligations are generally not enforceable by contempt)