Andrew R. Moody, Appellant,
Natalia Yevgenyevna Moody n/k/a Natalia Yevgenyevna Arrington, Appellee.
final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion
under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
appeal from the Circuit Court for Wakulla County. John C.
R. Moody, pro se, Appellant.
W. Horan, Edward W. Horan, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellee.
R. Moody appeals an order requiring him to pay the full
amount of a child support arrearage to his former wife
Natalia Y. Moody. Mr. Moody asserts that the final order
should be reversed because one of the three children for whom
the court ordered the payment of support actually lived with
him, which should have reduced the amount he was ordered to
pay. We agree and reverse.
case arises from a 2010 dissolution of marriage action. The
parties entered into a marital settlement agreement and
parenting plan approved by the court in which their three
children would spend most of their time with Ms. Moody. An
agreement between the parties called for Mr. Moody to pay
$820 per month in child support to Ms. Moody, and included a
step-down amount as each child became emancipated; with two
minor children, for example, the amount would be reduced to
$673 per month.
2016, Ms. Moody filed a motion for enforcement/contempt of
the child support order. She alleged that beginning in June
2015, Mr. Moody unilaterally reduced his payments of child
support. Mr. Moody quickly responded by filing his own
"motion" asserting that he was entitled to pay a
lesser amount because the oldest child began to live with him
in June 2015. He also asserted that the parties agreed to the
reduction of the child support amount.
magistrate held a hearing on the motion. The undisputed
testimony at the hearing was that the parties had three
children, the oldest of whom moved in with Mr. Moody in June
2015 until reaching the age of majority in August 2016.
Corresponding to the child's moving in with him, Mr.
Moody reduced the amount of his child support payments from
the court-ordered $820 per month to lesser amounts.
magistrate ultimately filed a report recommending that Ms.
Moody's motion be granted. She found that Mr. Moody had
unilaterally stopped paying the full amount of child support
without authorization or agreement. Mr. Moody was ordered to
pay the full $820 monthly child support amount from June 2015
forward, without regard for the fact that the oldest daughter
lived with him full-time (and then turned eighteen) during
this period. The magistrate's report stated that Mr.
Moody would have to file a petition for modification if he
sought to pay less child support.
Moody filed exceptions to the magistrate's report,
asserting among other things that it was error to order him
to pay the full child support amount when the eldest child
lived with him "100% of the time" from June 2015
forward. After the circuit court held a hearing on the
exceptions, it summarily rejected them. And Mr. Moody
with his appeal, Mr. Moody filed a "Supplemental
Petition" for retroactive modification of child support
as advised by the magistrate's report. This petition also
sought a retroactive adjustment of his child support
obligation corresponding to the oldest child living with him,
along the lines of his defense to the earlier motion. The
trial court denied the petition, however, finding that §
61.30(11)(c), Florida Statutes (2016), only permitted Mr.
Moody to recover overpayments ...