By Matthew E. Thatcher, B.C.S.

Daily in our practices we engage with people who lack the years of legal training and experience that comes from completing law school, passing the Bar exam, and engaging in a legal practice. Those people are our clients. They are trying to understand their cases and their options (without incurring legal fees) and often turn to generative AI platforms and Google services. We have all had that conversation or e-mail where our client confidently raises a wrong point of law or misstates a statute based upon their independent “research.” Their confident misstatement is the result of the basic programing principle of “garbage in – garbage out.” As any 1^st year law student could tell you, if you fail to include sufficient accurate detail in your search query, you won’t get a correct answer. 

When this happens, you should view it as an opportunity and not a frustration. We want our clients to be fully informed in their cases. We want them to have a correct understanding of the issues, options, and the legal strategies that we are presenting to them. They are paying us on an hourly basis for our knowledge and expertise to guide them through their legal issues. This is your opportunity to shine and validate the confidence that they placed in you. Since they are reaching out to “see” answers, you should give them something tangible. Send them a highlighted copy of a published decision emphasizing the correct point of law that you are relying upon in their case. Provide them a highlighted copy of the statute, rule of procedure, or administrative order which governs the matter. The better we are at doing this, the more informed our clients will be about their cases and thus able to make informed decisions about how to move forward. 

Chaired by Tina El Fadel 
and Kelly Barnes St. Clair

The Rules and Forms Committee is a hands‑on, working committee dedicated to reviewing existing and newly enacted family law rules and forms to evaluate practicality, consistency, and applicability within the practice of family law.

Each year brings new legislation, appellate decisions, and practical challenges that shape the practice of family law in Florida. The Rules and Forms Committee works diligently to analyze new, proposed, or possible rule changes or enactments to make recommendations or provide feedback when appropriate. In tandem with new or changed rules, the Committee reviews the Family Law Forms to ensure the same remain current, relevant, and workable for the judiciary, practitioners, and pro se litigants. The Committee will be proposing changes to the Instructions of a number of forms in light of recent rule changes related to Financial Affidavits.

Additionally, the Committee looks to the broader legal landscape to anticipate new rules or procedures which may affect the family law landscape. For example, there is currently a subcommittee reviewing Rule 1.202 of the Civil Rules of Procedure, which requires conferral before filing motions, to discuss ramifications should a similar rule be proposed to be added to the Family Law Rules of Procedure. There is also a subcommittee working on the creation of forms for Dependent Adult Children to align with section 61.1255 of the Florida Statutes.

The Committee works closely with fellow Family Law Section Committees and Florida Bar Committees to discuss, develop, or refine rules and forms to keep pace with the realities of modern practice. A subcommittee is currently working with the Guardian Ad Litem Ad Hoc Committee to draft proposed rules for Guardians Ad Litem, similar to the rules for parenting coordinators and mediators, to bring uniformity to the practice of Guardians Ad Litem across the state. 

The Rules and Forms Committee thrives on the insight and experience of our colleagues across the state. If you encounter a rule or form that seems outdated, unclear, or ripe for improvement, please email rules@familylawfla.org, or you are welcome to join one of our meetings. We meet the first Wednesday of the month via Zoom at noon.

Case Law Update

By Ronald Kauffman, B.C.S.


Webking v. Webking, 1D23-0771, December 31, 2025

The Father filed an appeal to a trial court's Final Judgment on Paternity, Time-sharing, and Child Support on multiple grounds. 

The trial court's child support and retroactive child support awards were reversed, due to its failure to make the required finding that the Father has the ability to pay the ordered support.

Specifically, and more importantly, the Father argued that the trial court erred in requiring him to pay 60 percent of the costs of the child's extracurricular activities because that provision could subject him to the expense of any extracurricular activity in which the Mother could unilaterally involve the child, without regard to the father’s ability to pay for the child’s activity. 

On appeal, the First District agreed. Relying on Gordon v. Gordon, 63 So. 3d 824, 827 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), which construed a similar provision ordering the father to cover 61.47% of the costs of the children's extracurricular activities as applying only to those activities that the parties agree upon, the First District similarly construed the extracurricular child support provision here as applying only to those extracurricular activities that the parties agree upon pursuant to shared parental responsibility. 

Finally, the trial court's post-judgment Order on Motion for Contempt and Income Withholding Order for Support pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.600(c)(3) was reversed because the contempt order failed to recite the facts upon which the court's finding of the Father's present ability to pay child support is based.