Siderias v. Kilpatrick

Appellant asserts there is no support in the record for the trial judge to have refused to terminate his duty to provide child support for his over-age children. He also says the judge erred by failing to make specific findings regarding the needs of these children. As to his latter argument, appellant is correct. Where a trial court has made no finding that a child over the age of eighteen is dependent, a continuation of child support payments is improper. The eviden-tiary findings should be specifically set out in the order. Gelman v. Gelman, 512 So.2d 236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). See also…