Rowe v. Rodriguez-Schmidt, 89 So. 3d 1101

After the divorce, the Former Husband sought a 2010 modification of child support which was granted in January 2010.
The Former Wife later learned the Former Husband had misstated income in the modification proceeding and moved to set it aside in June 2011.
In pursuing fees under section 61.16, the Former Wife provided 2009 and 2010 tax returns but redacted most information because they were filed jointly with her current husband, a nonparty seeking privacy.
The Former Husband moved to compel unredacted copies of those tax returns, arguing the current husband waived privacy by involvement in the litigation.
At the October 14, 2011 hearing, the trial court granted the motion to compel, finding the documents relevant and that the nonparty waived privacy.
The Former Wife petitioned for certiorari, arguing the order lacked evidentiary basis; the appellate court concluded the trial court departed from essential requirements of law and quashed the order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court departed from essential law in ordering disclosure of nonparty financials	Rowe contends no evidentiary basis for relevance	Rodriguez-Schmidt argues relevance and waiver by nonparty involvement	Yes; certiorari granted and order quashed

Parkway Bank v. Fort Myers Armature Works, Inc., 658 So.2d 646 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (three-part test for certiorari relief)
Williams v. Oken, 62 So.3d 1129 (Fla.2011) (certiorari scope and review limitations)
Rappaport v. Mercantile Bank, 17 So.3d 902 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (nonparties have no adequate remedy by appeal for financial disclosures)
Borck v. Borck, 906 So.2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (privacy and lack of evidentiary basis in discovery of financials)
Spry v. Prof'l Emp'r Plans, 985 So.2d 1187 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (relevance must be shown with evidence; avoid unsupported discovery)
DiSarrio v. Mills, 711 So.2d 1355 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (hearing insufficient if no evidence is presented)