Mudafort v. Lee
62 So. 3d 1196
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Mudafort and Lee married in 2006 and have a minor child; relocation to Bradenton was initially arranged but custody became contested.
- The parties entered a temporary mediated agreement providing substantially shared custody and a midway meeting point between Vero Beach and the Sarasota–Bradenton area.
- In the amended final judgment, the trial court awarded equal time-sharing and ordered Mudafort to pay $128 monthly child support based on income imputation.
- Mudafort appeals arguing (a) relocation-factor consideration, (b) Mancuso factors should have been applied, and (c) income imputation was erroneous.
- The appellate court affirms the relocation-factor ruling, holds Mancuso factors are unnecessary after statutory changes, and reverses the income-imputation ruling, remanding for actual income determination.
- Statutory changes in 2008 and 2009 eliminated a presumption against equal time-sharing, affecting Mancuso-factor analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Relocation factors considered correctly? | Mudafort argues the court erred in considering relocation factors. | Lee contends no error in evaluation of relocation factors. | Affirmed; relocation-factor consideration upheld. |
| Mancuso factors required after 2009 reforms? | Mudafort contends Mancuso factors should be weighed. | Lee asserts Mancuso factors unnecessary due to statutory changes. | No error; Mancuso factors not required. |
| Imputation of income for child support proper? | Mudafort challenges the imputed income amount. | Lee seeks imputed income based on prior earnings. | Reversed and remanded; no substantial evidence supports $500/week imputation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mancuso v. Mancuso, 789 So.2d 1249 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (abrogates presumption against equal time-sharing in light of later statutes)
- Mandell v. Mandell, 741 So.2d 617 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (milestones on rotating custody presumptions (pre-statutory changes))
- Rodriguez v. Medero, 17 So.3d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (two-step income-imputation inquiry for unemployment)
- Konsoulas v. Konsoulas, 904 So.2d 440 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (defines burden and steps for imputing income in domestic cases)