Fort Lauderdale Divorce Lawyer Blog

A recent survey by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers revealed that 73% of attorney's who practice marital and family law are reporting an increase in the demand for prenuptial agreements. Broward divorce attorneys believe that the recession has effected people's assets which now require protection in the event of a dissolution of marriage. Nowadays, the demand for prenuptial agreements is seen in the middle class and those individuals with substantial assets. While some individual's want no responsibility for their spouse's dent, others are protecting their pensions, 401k and retirement from equitable distribution.

An entrepreneur has recently created divorce insurance called WedLock. Customers are able to decide the size of the policy and the monthly premium based upon the selected plan. Divorce insurance polices range from $99 to $1,073 per month. Claims can not be submitted until a policy holder has had the plan for 36 months.

Marriage rates in the USA continue to drop. In 2000, 34.5% of individuals aged 25-34 had never been married. In 2009, the number increased to 46.3%. While marriage rates have dropped, many couples have just decided to live together and enter into a cohabitation agreement.

Before you decide to hire a divorce attorney in Ft. Lauderdale, it is essential that either you or your spouse has been a resident of Florida for 6 months before the filing of the petition. While marital and family lawyers in Broward refer to this as the "residency requirement", the legal term is referred to as subject matter jurisdiction.

A court acquires subject matter jurisdiction over a lawsuit either by the constitution or a specific statute. A husband and wife cannot create subject matter jurisdiction by waiver, acquiescence or agreement. In a divorce case, Florida Statute 61.021, confers subject matter jurisdiction upon the court and requires that either the husband or wife must reside in Florida for 6 months before the filing of the divorce petition. This residency requirement is not only jurisdictional but must be proved in every case by the filing party either by a Florida drivers license, voter's registration card or even an affidavit of a corroborating witness.

In Mikulec v Mikulec, the husband filed a petition for writ of prohibition and alleged that the divorce court did not have subject matter jurisdiction since he was not a resident of Florida for six months prior to the filing of the petition. While the trial court denied his motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the order did not contain any findings as to where the husband resided before the wife filed the divorce action. In grating the writ of certiorari, the Fourth District Court of Appeal remanded the case to the trial court with instructions to make a specific finding that the husband has been a resident of the State of Florida for six months prior to the filing of the petition for dissolution of marriage.

A divorce lawyer in Fort Lauderdale will always ask you about your occupation especially if your case may include alimony. A recent study explored a link between divorce and occupation. Have you ever wondered how your career can impact your marriage?

During the 2000 census, 16.35% of individuals listed themselves as separated or divorce. 14.5% of police officer, 43.1% of dancers and choreographer, 38.4% of bartenders and 38.2% of massage therapists were either divorced or separated. Other careers which landed in the top ten percent were casino employees, nurses, home health aids and telephone operators. On the otherhand, engineers, optometrists, clergy and podiatrists had occupations with low divorce rates. While these statistics are only from a limited scope of people, it is interesting to see how a job can impact your marriage.

Divorce lawyers in Miami have advised the Salt Lake Tribune that former Utah Jazz forward, Carlos Boozer, and his wife, Cindy have reached an amicable settlement. In her Petition for Dissolution of Marriage, the wife had advised that the parties had entered into a marital settlement agreement and parenting plan which includes a time-sharing schedule for their three minor children. A final uncontested hearing is scheduled this month before Judge Leon Firtel.

Boozer recently signed a five year contract as an unrestricted free agent with the Chicago Bulls. His deal is worth $75 million. He had surgery this week to fix a broken finger and is expected to return to playing basketball within two months.

The Daily Business Review is reporting that William E. Dellow, Jr., a Miami-Dade general magistrate, has resigned from the judicial position that he has held for 22 years. He is accused of making racial slurs to an Assistant State Attorney. Two years ago, Dellow was disciplined due to a sexual harassment claim brought by a colleague and moved from the family division where he heard divorce cases to the child support division. The sudden departure of this general magistrate leaves 400 child support cases up in the air while Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle and Circuit Judge Sandy Karlan are trying to solve this alarming problem.

Judges appoint members of The Florida Bar as general magistrates. The court is required to enter an order of referral to a general magistrate and obtain the consent of all parties. If your divorce attorney in Ft. Lauderdale objects to a matter being referred to the general magistrate, the matter must be heard by the judge assigned to the case. A general magistrate conducts hearings, hears testimony and reviews evidence. After the hearing, the general magistrate is required to file a report which contains factual findings, conclusions of law and recommendations. Either party may file exceptions to the report of a general magistrate within a specified time period which are ultimately reviewed by the divorce judge assigned to the case. Absent timely exceptions, the report of the general magistrate is generally adopted and ratified by the court.

The Miami Herald is reporting that the Supreme Court of Florida has issued its opinion in Kaaa v. Kaaa that addresses whether and under what circumstances passive appreciation of a marital home that is a nonmarital asset is subject to equitable distribution.

For 27 years, the parties resided in a home that was purchased by the husband for $36,500 six months before the marriage. During the marriage, marital funds were utilized to pay the mortgage and improve the home. Although the home was refinanced during the marriage, the wife was never placed on the title or deed. At trial, the parties stipulated that the value of the home was $225,000 and the outstanding balance of the mortgage was $12,871.46. The trial court found that the home was nonmarital, that the mortgage balance had been reduced by $22,279 and the renovation to the carport increased the value of the home by $14,400. Accordingly, the trial court ruled that the the enhancement value of the home, $36,679, was subject to equitable distribution and ordered the husband to pay the wife $18,339.50. In affirming the decision of the trial court, the Second District Court of Appeal held that the former wife was not entitled to equitable distribution of the passive appreciation of the real property.

The Supreme Court of Florida quashed the decision of the Second District Court of Appeal and concluded that passive appreciation of a non-marital asset is considered a marital asset when marital funds or the efforts of either party contributed to the appreciation. A nonmarital asset which appreciates during the marriage, only due to inflation or market conditions, becomes in part a marital asset, if it has indebtedness which is reduced by marital funds. Improvements or expenditure of marital monies which results in the enhancenment of the value of a nonmarital asset is an asset subject to equitable distribution. Additionally, the nonowner spouse is also required to have made contributions to the property during the marriage by investing marital funds or the efforts of either party.

In determining whether a nonowner spouse is entitled to a portion of the passive appreciation, the court is required to perform a five part test. First, the court is to ascertain the fair market value of the property. Next, the court is required to determine whether there has been passive appreciation in the home's value. Third of all, the court must find that the passive appreciation is a marital asset under Florida Statute 61.075(2) by virtue of whether marital funds were used to pay the mortgage, whether their were contributions to the property by the nonowner spouse and the extent that these contributions affected the appreciation of the nonmarital asset. Fourth, the court is to then determine the value of the passive appreciation that accrued during the marriage. Finally, the court is to compute how the passive appreciation should be allocated by dividing the indebtedness at the time of the marriage by the value of the asset at the time of the marriage.

If you have property that is non-marital or believe that you may have an interest in your spouse's nonmarital property, you should consult with a divorce lawyer in Broward to discuss your rights.