Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...the complaints in the circuit court. Effective January 1, 2006, the Legislature amended chapter 409 to permit the Department to initiate an administrative proceeding to determine paternity and an obligation to provide support in actions like these. § 409.256, Fla....

...or voluntary acknowledgment of *59 paternity, which is witnessed by two individuals and signed under penalty of perjury as specified by section 92.525(2), creates a rebuttable presumption, as defined by section 90.304-.... ” (emphasis supplied)); § 409.256(10)(d), Fla....

...ment for a "verified affidavit." But, in fact, there is at least one reference in Florida Statutes to a "verified affidavit," in section 932.703, Florida Statutes (2004), the statute dealing with forfeitures. Oddly, there are other statutes, such as section 409.256(2)(a)(5), Florida Statutes, (Paternity) that allow alternatively either (1) an affidavit or (2) "a written declaration as provided in section 92.525(2)." Why would the legislature need to authorize a section 92.525(2) declaration as a...

...quirements of the law. Because this departure may result in harm that cannot be remedied on appeal, [1] we grant the petition and quash the order under review. On March 13, 2009, the Department issued a Final Administrative Support Order pursuant to section 409.2563, Florida Statutes (2009), [2] which provided that Lynch had a legal duty to contribute to the support of Carnley's child, who was born in November 2005, "because he is the father and a noncustodial parent." The order further provided...

...1st DCA 2006) ("We find that subjecting Mother and Child to a potentially intrusive [paternity] test ... is enough to constitute irreparable harm."); see also State, Dep't of Revenue ex rel. Chambers v. Travis, 971 So.2d 157, 159 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), and the authorities cited therein. [2] Section 409.2563(1)(a) defines an "administrative support order" as "a final order rendered by or on behalf of the department pursuant to this section establishing or modifying the obligation of a parent to contribute to the support and maintenance of his or her child or children ...." § 409.2563(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2009) (emphasis added). Thus, such orders "assume that paternity has already been established or is being established in a separate administrative proceeding pursuant to section 409.256, Florida Statutes." Long, 937 So.2d at 1237.

...ivision of Administrative Hearing's ("DOAH") order directing Respondent, Mother, and Child to submit to DNA testing to establish paternity even though Respondent previously signed an acknowledgment of paternity. The hearing below was conducted under section 409.2563, Florida Statutes (2005)....

...Instead, his case was referred to DOAH and, subsequent to a hearing, DOAH issued a temporary administrative support order requiring Respondent to pay child support pending the results of genetic testing, which DOAH also ordered. Initially, we relied on Mendez v. Department of Revenue, 898 So.2d 1060 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), and section 409.2563(2)(f), Florida Statutes (2005), [1] in determining that DOR was required to halt the administrative process and continue in circuit court once the request for paternity testing was made....

...that trigger a termination of the administrative proceedings under section 490.2563(2)(f). Therefore, section 490.2563(2)(f) is inapplicable. We find that neither DOR nor DOAH has jurisdiction to hear or determine issues of disputed paternity under section 409.2563(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2005). A proceeding under this statute presumes that paternity has already been established or is being established in a separate administrative proceeding pursuant to section 409.256, Florida Statutes (2005). This is evidenced by the use of the term "non-custodial parent" in the statutory language of section 409.2563, as opposed *1237 to "putative father," which means "an individual who is or may be the biological father of a child whose paternity has not been established and whose mother was unmarried when the child was conceived and born." See Section 490.256(1)(g), Florida Statutes (emphasis added). The ALJ departed from the essential requirements of law when she ordered genetic testing under section 409.2563, Florida Statutes (2005). See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Kaklamanos, 843 So.2d 885, 890 (Fla.2003) (explaining that failure of a court to follow a controlling statute can be a departure from the essential requirements of law and a basis to grant a petition for certiorari). Section 409.2563(2)(b) clearly establishes that DOAH does not have jurisdiction to determine disputed paternity....

...ed. We, therefore, GRANT the petition for writ of certiorari and QUASH the order for genetic testing. We also REMAND and instruct the ALJ below to enter a final administrative order regarding support. ALLEN, DAVIS, and THOMAS, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 409.2563(2)(f), Florida Statutes (2005), states, "The department [DOR] shall terminate the administrative proceeding and file an action in circuit court to determine support if within 20 days after receipt of the initial notice the noncustodial parent ....

...g Officer's Report and Recommendation as the Order of the court, which included a ruling granting Appellee's Motion for Modification. The Department asserts that the circuit court entered the modification provisions without jurisdiction, in light of section 409.256, Florida Statutes. We disagree and affirm. Appellee's child support obligations were originally established by the Department's final administrative support order entered on May 28, 2008, via the process described in section 409.2563, Florida Statutes....

...upport payment would total $237.00. The Department argues that the second order, which prospectively reduced the father's total payments from $433.63 per month to $237.00 per month, was entered without jurisdiction. The Department relies on sections 409.2563(11) and (12), Florida Statutes, for its position that the Department has the sole authority to modify its administrative orders and a circuit court has no jurisdiction to do so. We find to the contrary. The provisions of section 409.2563 provide for a circuit court's prospective modification of child support payments originally established by administrative support order. The introductory language in section 409.2563, Florida Statutes specifically describes the legislative intent of the statute: It is not the Legislature's intent to limit the jurisdiction of the circuit courts to hear and determine issues regarding child support. This section is intended to provide the department with an alternative procedure for establishing child support obligations in Title IV-D cases in a fair and expeditious manner when there is no court order of support. § 409.2563(2)(a), Fla. Stat. In addition, section 409.2563(10)(c), Florida Statutes clearly recognizes the circuit court's authority to issue an order prospectively changing the support obligation thusly: (c) A circuit court of this state, where venue is proper and the court has jurisdiction...

...enter an order prospectively changing the support obligations established in an administrative support order, in which case the administrative support order is superseded and the court's order shall govern future proceedings in the case . . . . *117 § 409.2563(10)(c), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). The portions of section 409.2563 relied upon by the Department each refer to superseding orders by the circuit court. § 409.2563(11) & (12), Fla. Stat. In Dept. of Revenue ex rel. Chamberlain v. Manasala, 982 So.2d 1257, 1259 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), this District Court of Appeal recognized that when read together, sections 120.68(2) and 409.2563(10), Florida Statutes "authorize the circuit court to supersede the entry of an administrative support order by entering only a prospective order modifying the child support award." The order on appeal in this case is exactly that—a prospec...

...The Department of Revenue (DOR) appeals a final order entered by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), contending that neither the ALJ nor the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) had subject matter jurisdiction to require the mother on whose behalf DOR had initiated a proceeding under section 409.2563, Florida *918 Statutes (2009), to pay child support, where DOR had not referred that question for adjudication and, indeed, lacked any authority to order support payments from a parent for whom it was acting, a parent who is, after all, statutorily denominated "the parent from whom support is not being sought." § 409.2563(4), Fla....

...This section does not grant jurisdiction to [DOR] or [DOAH] to hear or determine issues of dissolution of marriage, separation, alimony or spousal support, termination of parental rights, dependency, disputed paternity, except for a determination of paternity as provided in s. 409.256, or award of or change of time-sharing. This paragraph notwithstanding, [DOR] and [DOAH] may make findings of fact that are necessary for a proper determination of a parent's support obligation as authorized by this section. § 409.2563(2), Fla. Stat. (2009). Section 409.2563, Florida Statutes, lays out the procedure DOR must follow to establish child support obligations administratively....

...[4] DOR complied with the statutory mandate to "provide to the parent from whom support is not being sought and serve the parent from whom support is being sought with a notice of proceeding to establish administrative support order and a blank financial affidavit form." § 409.2563(4), Fla. Stat. (2009). DOR then calculated Mr. Selles's "child support obligation under the child support guidelines schedule as provided by s. 61.30, based on any timely financial affidavits received and other information available to the department." § 409.2563(5)(a), Fla....

...Again in conformity with statutory directives, DOR sent "to both parents ... copies of the proposed administrative support order, its completed child support worksheet, and any financial affidavits submitted by a parent or prepared by the department." § 409.2563(5)(b), Fla....

...DOR's Proposed Order of Paternity and Administrative Support proposed requiring Mr. Selles to pay child support in the amount of $357.60 each month. As it had to, the proposed support order included a notice of rights, including the right to a hearing, for "the parent from whom support is being sought." § 409.2563(5)(c), Fla....

...(2009). When Mr. Selles requested a hearing, DOR forwarded his request to DOAH, which assigned the case to an administrative law judge who set the matter for hearing on January 26, 2010, to determine the issue "[a]s set forth in the proposed order." See § 409.2563(6), Fla....

...(2009) ("If the parent from whom support is being sought files a timely request for hearing, [DOR] shall refer the hearing request to [DOAH]."). In this way, the ALJ acquired final order authority to "issue an administrative support order, or a final order denying an administrative support order." § 409.2563(7)(a), Fla....

...On the present appeal, DOR contends that the ALJ lacked jurisdiction to require any payment of Ms. Smith, the child's mother, or to order any payments to Ms. Phillips, the child's grandmother. We agree with DOR's first contention, but not with the second. Section 409.2563 differentiates between "the parent from whom support is being sought" and "the parent from whom support is not being sought." The statute requires DOR to calculate the child support obligation only of "the parent from whom support is...

...hority on DOR to litigate or on DOAH to adjudicate any other potential obligor's rights. The statute contemplates only one parent's support obligation's being determined in the hearing at DOAH—that of "the parent from whom support is being sought." § 409.2563(4), Fla....

..."This Court must interpret statutes by the well-established norms of statutory construction which require rendering the statutory provisions meaningful." Crutcher v. Sch. Bd. of Broward County, 834 So.2d 228, 232 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Within the meaning of section 409.2563, Ms....

...But the same and similar principles of statutory construction require rejection of DOR's second contention on appeal, viz., that the ALJ lacked statutory authority to direct that the child support payments for which Mr. Selles was obligated be paid to Ms. Phillips for the child's benefit, not to Ms. Smith. Under section 409.2563(2)(c), DOR initiated the administrative proceedings below on behalf of the child's mother, not the child's grandmother, so DOR can be said to have been proceeding on behalf of Ms....

..."Support is a dual obligation owed by both biological parents to their child from the moment of the child's birth. See Armour v. Allen, 377 So.2d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)." Morris v. Swanson, 940 So.2d 1256, 1257 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). While creating a supplemental administrative process, section 409.256(2)(f), Florida Statutes (2009), makes clear that the courts remain open: This section is intended to provide [DOR] with an alternative procedure for establishing paternity and child support obligations in Title IV-D cases....

...The Proposed Order of Paternity and Administrative Support Mr. Selles originally received advised him that he "or the custodial parent may file a civil action in an appropriate circuit court at any time to determine your support obligations, if any." Section 409.2563(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2009), provides: "Either parent, or a caretaker relative if applicable, may at any time file a civil action in a circuit court having jurisdiction and proper venue to determine parental support obligations, if any....

...des. The statute authorizes such redirection "in a Title IV-D case [where] a child for whom a support order has been entered by a tribunal of this state resides with a person other than the obligee or obligor." § 409.2558(8), Fla. Stat. (2009). [2] Section 409.256, Florida Statutes (2009), applies to proceedings to establish both the fact of paternity and the amount of child support. See § 409.256(4)(b), Fla....

...nistrative Support, based on the child support guidelines in section 61.30, Florida Statutes. [4] DOR "may establish a parent's child support obligation," by proceeding on behalf of: 1. An applicant or recipient of public assistance, as provided by ss. 409.2561 and 409.2567; 2. A former recipient of public assistance, as provided by s. 409.2569; 3. An individual who has applied for services as provided by s. 409.2567; 4. Itself or the child, as provided by s. 409.2561; or 5. A state or local government of another state, as provided by chapter 88. § 409.2563(2)(c), Fla....

...d of living, and the financial status and ability of each parent. § 61.30(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2009). "[T]he department may establish a parent's child support obligation pursuant to this section, s. 61.30, and other relevant provisions of state law." § 409.2563(2)(c), Fla....

...[8] As DOR concedes, a relative caregiver (like Ms. Phillips) can apply to the department for child support services, and DOR can act on her behalf to obtain support from both parents. It is also clear that there is no attorney-client relationship between DOR and the child support obligee. See § 409.2567(2), Fla....

...trial court is without subject matter jurisdiction over the motion [for sanctions]”). The ALJ correctly determined that a motion for rehearing is not authorized in the context of the administrative establishment of child support obligations under section 409.2563, Florida Statutes....

...ation through administrative proceedings despite appellant’s claims that he was not the biological father. Specifically, appellant argues (I) the Department erred in failing to engage in informal discussions about his paternity dispute pursuant to section 409.2563(5)(c)5, Florida Statutes (2015); (II) the Department erred in failing to amend its proposed administrative support order when appellant provided the Department with new information that a DNA test concluded he was not the biological...

...The Department also issued an income deduction order that required appellant’s employer to deduct appellant’s child support obligation from his pay. I, Informal Discussions Appellant argues the Department erred in failing to engage in informal discussions regarding his paternity dispute. Section 409.2563(5)(c)5, Florida Statutes (2015), states that within ten days after the Department issues a proposed administrative support order, a parent may “contact a department representative ......

...tment to “immediately close this file” and to “contact me ... to resolve this matter.” Counsel argues this letter constituted a request for informal discussions; however, the Department failed to engage in informal discussions as required by section 409.2563(5)(c)5 and instead issued the final administrative support order. The Department agrees that section 409.2563(5)(c)5 requires it to enter into informal discussions regarding a proposed support order; however, it argues that this Section does not require it to informally discuss paternity, which is an issue that was not determined by the support order and lies outside of the Department’s jurisdiction. The Department is correct. Section 409.2563(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2015), which governs administrative proceedings by the Department to establish child support, states that “[t]his section does hot grant jurisdiction to the department or the Division of Administrative Hearings to hear or determine issues of ... disputed paternity, except for a determination of paternity as provided in s. 409.256.” Section 409.256(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2015), permits the Department to commence a paternity proceeding if no one is named as the father oh the child’s birth certificate and the child’s paternity has not otherwise been established. Here, appellant acknowledges that his name was on the birth certificate, and thus section 409.256 does not apply....

...llenge to his paternity, and that any challenge to his paternity must have been filed in circuit court. It is unclear what else appellant’s counsel believes the Department could have said during informal discussions. The Department did not violate section 409.2563(5)(c)5 by failing to informally discuss a matter over which it had already informed appellant that it lacked jurisdiction to consider....

...DNA Test Results Appellant argues the Department erred in failing to amend its proposed administrative support order after appellant responded by giving the Department “new” information that a DNA test determined that appellant was not the father. Section 409.2563(5)(d), Florida Statutes (2015), states that after the Department submits a proposed administrative support order, if “the department receives additional information that makes it necessary to amend the proposed administrative suppo...

...the income deduction order. Second, appellant’s counsel has similarly failed to provide any authority to support her argument that a final administrative support order must specify the information relied on by the Department in calculating income. Section 409.2563(5)(a) states that “[i]f either parent fails to comply with the requirement to furnish a financial affidavit, the department may proceed on the basis of information available from any source, if such information is sufficiently reliable and detailed to allow calculation of guideline schedule amounts under s....

...etroactive to April 1, 2014, which was the approximate date upon which he was served with modification pleadings. The Department argued that such modifications, whether done by a circuit judge or an administrative court, are governed by sections 409.2563 and 61.14, Florida Statutes, which—when read together—contemplate such awards....

...Based on our analysis, the most natural reading of the entire statutory framework is that the Legislature intended that ALJs have the same degree of authority that circuit judges have when retroactively modifying their own support orders. We turn first to section 409.2563, entitled “Administrative establishment of child support obligations,” which establishes the basis for the administrative determination of child support obligations, which previously had been the province of the circuit courts...

...ure for determining when child support should be enforced against an absent parent of a child receiving public 3 the circuit courts to hear and determine issues regarding child support,” id. § (2)(a), as section 409.256 gives the Department concurrent jurisdiction with the circuit courts to determine paternity-related child support orders. Instead, section 409.2563 “is intended to provide the department with an alternative procedure for establishing child support obligations ....

...in a fair and expeditious manner when there is no court order of support.” Id. By establishing this administrative process, ALJs are empowered to “make findings of fact that are necessary for a proper determination of a parent’s support obligation as authorized by this section.” Id. § 409.2563(2)(b)....

...The parent’s obligation determined by the department may include any obligation to pay retroactive support and any obligation to provide for health care for a child, whether through insurance coverage, reimbursement of expenses, or both. Id. § 409.2563(2)(c) (emphasis added). “Retroactive support” is defined as “a child support obligation established pursuant to s. 61.30(17).” Id. § 409.2563(1)(g)....

...behalf of a child under 18 years old who has an absent parent. 4 which may include provisions for monetary support, retroactive support, health care, and other elements of support pursuant to chapter 61.” Id. § 409.2563(1)(a) (emphasis added); see also id. § 409.2563(7)(e)(5) (administrative support order “must comply with ss....

...and the one presented here—is whether an administrative modification of such an order may be retroactive to the date of the service of the modification request. At this juncture, we run squarely into potentially conflicting language in sections 409.2563 and 61.14. Section 409.2563(12) states: (12) Modification of administrative support order.--If it has not been superseded by a subsequent court order, the department may modify, suspend, or terminate an administrative support order in a Title IV...

...case prospectively, subject to the requirements for modifications of judicial support orders established in chapters 61 and 409, by following the same procedures set forth in this section for establishing an administrative support order, as applicable. § 409.2563(12), Fla....

...ntal action for modification as equity requires, giving due regard to the changed circumstances or the financial ability of the parties or the child. § 61.14(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). The highlighted language—if imputed into section 409.2563(12) as that section seems to suggest—allows administrative modification of an administrative support order “retroactively to the date of the filing of the action or supplemental action for modification.” In other words, an a...

...In cases like the present one, subsection 61.14(1)(a) allows modifications to potentially extend back further in time than section 61.30(11)(c) would permit. 6 same way that a judicial court can. But for the word “prospectively” in subsection 409.2563(12), the two statutory frameworks—61.14(1)(a) and 409.2563(12)—would dovetail in a seamless and unified way....

...alternative to the judicial forum, presumably as a more accessible and cost- efficient intermediary, unless a civil action is instituted in a circuit court, whose subsequent support order “prospectively supersedes an administrative support order rendered by the department.” Id. § 409.2563(2)(d) (emphasis added)....

...Absent circuit court intervention, an “administrative support order rendered under this section has the same force and effect as a court order and may be enforced by any circuit court in the same manner as a support order issued by the court, except for contempt.” Id. § 409.2563(10)(b)....

...available to intervene when deemed warranted by parents, caregivers, or necessary parties.3 3 A parent or caregiver “may at any time file a civil action in a circuit court having 7  Unlike section 61.14, as previously discussed, section 409.2563(10)(c) says that circuit courts are without authority to retroactively modify administrative support orders, allowing a circuit court to only “enter an order prospectively changing the support obligations established in an administrative support order, in which case the administrative support order is superseded and the court’s order shall govern future proceedings in the case.” Id. § 409.2563(10)(c) (emphasis added)....

...Lienhar v. Secor, 146 So. 3d 1250, 1252 jurisdiction and proper venue to determine parental support obligations, if any. A support order issued by a circuit court prospectively supersedes an administrative support order rendered by the department.” Id. § 409.2563(2)(d). 8 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (“It is well established that a circuit court lacks jurisdiction to vacate or retroactively affect an administrative child support order entered pursuant to section 409.2563 administrative proceedings....

...e support orders, and in light of the Department’s authority to administratively establish and modify child support obligations as an alternative to proceedings in circuit court, it seems incongruous to interpret the word “prospectively” in section 409.2563(12) as totally nullifying any administrative modification of administrative support orders....

...“prospectively” was meant to make it impossible for any tribunal to make retroactive modifications to administrative support orders. In construing the statute as we do, we necessarily decline to accept the argument that the term, “as applicable,” referenced in section 409.2563(12), was meant to limit section 61.14(1)(a)’s grant of authority to retroactively modify support obligations....

...We agree with the Department’s position that this phrase must be read as referring to the immediately preceding words, “by following the same procedures set forth in this section for establishing an administrative support 10 order.” § 409.2563(12); see City of St....

paternity and/or support in the circuit court. See § 409.256(4)(a) 12., Fla. Stat. (requiring party to file

paternity and/or support in the circuit court. See § 409.256(4)(a) 12., Fla. Stat. (requiring party to file

...See § 409.2557(1), Fla. Stat. (2011). Support obligations are based on the child support guidelines in section 61.30, Florida Statutes, and may include retroactive support pursuant to section 61.30(17), Florida Statutes. See §§ 61.046(21); 61.30; 409.2563(l)(a), (l)(g), (4)(f), Fla....

...the child, not to exceed a 'period of ¾ months preceding the filing of the petition, regardless of whether that date precedes the filing of the petition. *536 § 61.30(17), Fla. Stat. (2011) (emphasis added). In cases in which paternity is unknown, section 409.256, Florida Statutes, gives the Department the option to either commence paternity and support proceedings at the same time, or commence a paternity proceeding first, and if paternity is established, follow up with a support proceeding. See §§ 409.256(2)(a), (4), Fla. Stat. (2011). If the Department chooses the latter option, it must provide separate notices for the paternity proceeding and the support proceeding. See § 409.256(4)(a)7.b., Fla. Stat. (2011). The Department need not obtain separate orders, but may await a combined paternity and support order at the conclusion of the support proceeding. See §§ 409.256(4)(a)7., (9), Fla....

...proceeding was served on the putative father. We agree. But while the Department reasons that the later notice of support proceeding essentially amends — and thus, relates back to — the notice of paternity proceeding, we conclude, instead, that section 409.256(4) creates a bifurcated administrative proceeding that begins with service of the notice of paternity proceeding. According to the statute, “[t]he Department of Revenue shall commence a proceeding to determine paternity, or a proceeding to determine both paternity and child support, by serving the respondent with a notice as provided in this section.” § 409.256(4), Fla....

...That if the results of the genetic test indicate a statistical probability of paternity that equals or exceeds 99 percent, the department may: a. Issue a proposed order of paternity that the respondent may consent to or contest at an administrative hearing; or b. Commence a proceeding, as provided in s. 409.2563, to establish an administrative support order for the child. Notice of the proceeding shall be provided to the respondent by regular mail. § 409.256(4)(a)7., Fla. Stat. (2011) (emphasis added). Cf. § 409.2563(4), Fla. Stat. (2011) (providing that for support proceedings initiated under that section, notice is to be served by certified mail or by service of process as in a civil action). Therefore, under the procedure set forth in section 409.256(4), service of a notice of paternity proceeding commences the administrative action....

...od preceding the date a paternity action was filed in circuit court, the service date of the notice of paternity proceeding likewise should be the operative date for administrative proceedings in which the Department uses the bifurcated procedure in section 409.256(4)....

...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....

...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....

...“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 resul...