Fort Lauderdale Divorce Lawyer Blog

A bill filed before the Florida Legislature on November 2nd would prohibit judges presiding over a divorce from considering adultery when awarding alimony, place limits on the total amount and length of time alimony may be awarded, and allow divorce agreements in which alimony was awarded to be reopened and renegotiated. House Bill 549 would also terminate all alimony payments once the spouse ordered to pay reaches the age of retirement.

House Bill 549 was filed by Brevard County legislator Ritch Workman. Interestingly, Representative Workman filed the bill only eight days after his own divorce was finalized in Florida. Although alimony was not awarded in Workman's divorce, the Melbourne legislator has stated he believes current Florida alimony laws are inequitable.

Alimony is a tool used by Florida courts to maintain each party's standard of living after a divorce. Alimony is not awarded in all circumstances, however, as an award of alimony is contingent upon the financial needs of one spouse and the others ability to pay. Additionally, the length of the marriage also plays a factor in an alimony award.

House Bill 549 is part of a growing trend to reform alimony laws both in Florida and across the nation. Workman's bill was modeled after similar legislation passed recently in Massachusetts. If the bill passes in Florida, its effects would be far-reaching. Even routine divorce settlements could be reopened and reexamined. Since filing House Bill 549, Representative Workman has stated specific portions, such as a cap on awards, should be removed.

The bill closely follows on the heels of recent amendments to the permanent alimony provisions of Florida Statute 61.08 which took effect on July 1, 2011. Permanent alimony is normally awarded to a spouse who is no longer capable of meeting basic financial needs after a long term marriage of more than 17 years. Permanent alimony may also be awarded at the discretion of a judge after a moderate or short-term marriage is dissolved. Since July 1st, Florida courts must now determine no other alimony award is "fair and reasonable under the circumstances," when permanent alimony is awarded. For moderate-term marriages of 7-17 years, clear and convincing evidence permanent alimony is the appropriate award is now required.

Continue reading "New Florida Bill Would Limit Alimony and Ignore Cheating" »

Divorce attorney's in Miami, Coral Gables, Hallandale, Plantation and other South Florida cities are preparing for a statutory overhaul regarding legislative modifications to the statute governing alimony. One of the most significant changes is the codification of bridge-the-gap alimony.

Bridge-the-gap alimony assists a party in making the transition from being married to being single. It assists a party with identifiable short term financial needs. A marital and family law judge may not award bridge-the-gap alimony for a period in excess of 2 years. Bridge-the-gap alimony terminates upon the death of either party or upon remarriage of the party that receives alimony. Last but not least, bridge-the-gap alimony is non-modifiable in amount or duration.

Another important change to alimony relates to rehabilitative alimony. Rehabilitative alimony assists a party in redeveloping previous skills or credentials. It also helps a spouse acquire education, training or work experience necessary to develop employment skills. In the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage, the court must detail a defined rehabilitative plan. A party may modify or terminate rehabilitative based upon a substantial change in circumstances or compliance with the rehabilitative plan.

Next, durational alimony will be used by courts when permanent alimony is not appropriate but a party needs economic assistance for a period of time after a short or moderate term marriage. A recipient of durational alimony can not receive this alimony for a period of time that exceeds that of the marriage. While the length of durational alimony is non-modifiable absent exceptional circumstances, the amount can be modified once there has been a substantial change in circumstances. Durational alimony terminates upon the death of either party or if the recipient gets remarried.

Finally, permanent alimony can be awarded after a long or moderate term marriage. It is generally used to provide for the needs and necessities of life established during the marriage for a party who does not have the financial ability to meet his or her needs. An award of permanent alimony can be modified or terminated based upon a substantial change in circumstances or if the recipient is involved in a supportive relationship. Permanent alimony alimony terminates upon the death of either party or if the recipient gets remarried.

In Purrinos v Purrinos, the wife appealed the decision of the Miami-Dade divorce court that failed to award her any type of alimony. The parties were married for 16 years. At the time of the dissolution of marriage action, the husband and wife has three young children. The only marital asset was the marital residence. While both parties were employed during the marriage, the husband earned more than the wife. At the trial, the husband testified that he was involuntarily and temporarily employed. However, he expected to find a new job in the future.

In reversing the decision of the divorce court, the Third District Court of Appeal held that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to award the Wife alimony. The court reasoned that while an alimony award was inappropriate at the time of trial because of the husband's inability to pay at that time, he may possess the ability to pay alimony in the future. Accordingly, the case was remanded to the trial court with instructions to award the wife a nominal amount of permanent periodic alimony.

In Greenwald v Greenwald, the husband and wife were married on May 18, 2004. Fourteen months later, the parties filed for divorce in Miami-Dade. In support of her claim for permanent alimony, the wife claimed that the husband induced her to quit her job were she earned $100,00 per year. At trial, e-mail evidence proved that this claim was false since the wife wanted to quit her job prior to the marriage.

While the wife's request for permanent periodic alimony was denied, Judge Scott Bernstein awarded her $65,000 in attorney's fees and costs to be paid by the husband. In reversing the trial court's award of attorney's fees and costs to the wife, the Third District Court of Appeal held that the Miami divorce court should have denied the wife's request for attorney's fees and costs. The court reasoned that the wife made a claim for permanent alimony in a short-term marriage which is rarely successful, the case went to trial on the permanent alimony issue, the basis of the claim was false and the wife turned down a favorable opportunity to settle the alimony matter before trial in a lump sum payment of $36,000.

In Vigo v. Vigo, the Florida marital and family law court awarded the wife permanent periodic alimony in the amount of $5,500 per month. The Third District Court of Appeals, located south of Broward County, reversed the Florida Divorce Judge Maxine Cohen Lando's decision to award the wife permanent periodic alimony because under Florida law, the wife is not a candidate for permanent periodic alimony.

Permanent periodic alimony is generally reserved for long term marriages, or for marriages where a major inequity is created by the dissolution. This type of alimony is used to maintain the lifestyle that the parties were accustomed to during the duration of the marriage. When determining whether permanent periodic alimony is appropriate, the court also considers the need of the party requesting alimony and the ability of the party who is obligated to pay.

In this case, need turned on whether the Wife would be able to work after the divorce. During the seven and one half year marriage, the Wife worked for three and a half years as a housekeeper and for one year operating her own used car business. In 2005, when she stopped working, the Husband supported her. The evidence on record reflected that the Wife had "serious chronic health problems;" however, the appellate court found that she lived a rather active lifestyle, attending church for three hours at a time, shopping, taking her dog to the park for two hours a day, and visiting the beauty salon. The appellate court found that her ailments would not prevent her from obtaining a sedentary job.

Furthermore, the record indicated that the Wife was capable of being trained. The evidence in support of this was that the Wife, not a native English speaker, took English classes, passed the GED in English and passed the United States Naturalization test in English. Additionally, the Wife had worked as a housekeeper, nurse assistant, seamstress, an independent sales consultant, a masseuse and she has owned her own business. After careful review of the record, the appellate court determined that the Wife was capable of earning approximately $28,000 per year after taking a year of English courses and acquiring either an Associates Degree or a Certificate of Competency.

Based on the evidence presented at trial, the appellate court found that the trial court abused its discretion because this was a short term marriage. The court also found that the parties lived a modest lifestyle while married, the Wife had been awarded a $250,000 lump sum, no children were born of the marriage, the Wife was immediately employable or could be retrained over a three to four year period, and finally despite her health problems the Wife lived an active, healthy lifestyle. Thus, the Third District reversed the award and remanded for the court to consider an award of rehabilitative alimony instead.

Rehabilitative alimony is used to provide the recipient with money to eventually become self sufficient. To receive rehabilitative alimony the parties must establish a rehabilitative plan. A rehabilitative plan must be specific and should address the object of the rehabilitation, the cost of the plan, and the projected period necessary to establish the recipient's self sufficiency.