¶1We affirm an order of contempt for failure to pay child support. The trial court correctly recognized that there was no ambiguity, notwithstanding an inartfully worded provision in the parties’ settlement agreement. Therefore, the court did not err by failing to determine the intent of the parties in interpreting the provision and by applying the plain and reasonable meaning of the agreement. See Dune I, Inc. v. Palms N. Owners Ass’n, Inc., 605 So.2d 903, 905 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); see also Royal Am. Realty, Inc. v. Bank of Palm Beach & Trust Co., 215 So.2d 336, 337-38 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). The court’s order is supported by the record.
718 So. 2d 202
Terrano v. Terrano
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided July 15, 1998
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1998-07-15
Relies on 215 So. 2d 336 - Royal American Rlty., Inc. v. Bank of Palm Beach & Tr. Co. · 605 So. 2d 903 - DUNE I v. Palms North Owners Ass'n
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1998-07-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 2015
6 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →