COVID-19 UPDATE: Sandy T. Fox, P.A. remains open remotely to serve our community and assist them with their family law needs. We can be reached via the contact form on the site, and meetings can be handled virtually through the Zoom teleconferencing app.

Published on: | by

It is not uncommon for married couples to earn disparate incomes; if they divorce, the courts may award the lesser earning spouse alimony or child support. The courts will not only consider a person’s salary when determining their income but also other sources of revenue. As illustrated in a recent Florida ruling, though, not all money received from an employer is necessarily considered income. If you or your spouse are considering ending your marriage and you have concerns about the financial impact of the decision, it is wise to talk to a skilled Miami divorce attorney as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the parties married in 2011 and had four children. They decided to end their marriage and proceeded with a divorce action. The father, who worked for a construction and utility company, was required to travel for work. He received per diem payments from his employer to offset the cost of travel. In determining the father’s income for purposes of calculating alimony and child support, the trial court included amounts listed on the father’s earning statements as per diem as income. The father appealed the final judgment of dissolution of marriage, arguing, among other things, that the court incorrectly calculated his income.

Determining Income for Purposes of Calculating Child Support

On appeal, the court determined that the trial court erred in ruling that the money the father received as a per diem from his employer was considered income. Specifically, the court noted that under Florida law, gross income only includes in kind payments or reimbursed expenses to the extent that they reduced living expenses. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Many people living in and around Miami regularly travel out of the country. While international travel is not a cause for concern under ordinary circumstances, it can be when it involves a minor child whose parents share custody. In such instances, the courts may impose limitations regarding how and when either parent can leave the country with the child, and if a parent violates an order imposing such limitations, they may face sanctions. Recently, the dedicated Miami child custody attorneys of the Law Offices of Sandy T. Fox, P.A., dealt with such an issue in a case where the mother failed to abide by requirements for traveling internationally with a child. We were able to obtain sanctions against the mother in the amount of $10,000. If you have questions regarding your rights as a parent, you should contact us as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the mother and the father married and, in 2013, had a child. They divorced in 2015 and entered into a marital settlement agreement that the trial court adopted as part of the final judgment of dissolution. In the agreement, the parties established that if either parent wanted to travel internationally with the child, they would provide the other parent with a week’s notice in writing. Additionally, the agreement stated that if a parent failed to provide adequate notice, they would owe the other parent $10,000 and would be prohibited from traveling internationally with the child while they were a minor.

Allegedly, in 2019 the trial court entered an order stating that the mother could travel internationally with the child without the father’s consent. She took the child to Ireland later that year without notifying the father. He moved for contempt and asked the court to order the mother to pay him $10,000 and bar her from taking the child out of the country in the future. The court denied the motion, and the father appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Parents who share custody of a child do not always agree as to what is best for their child with regard to education. If they cannot resolve a dispute over a child’s schooling, they may ask the court to intervene. The Florida courts always aim to rule in the best interest of the child that is the subject of a custody disagreement, but sometimes their aim falls short. This was demonstrated in a recent Florida opinion in which the appellate court reversed the trial court ruling ordering that a child should attend public school. If you need help with a custody issue, it is advisable to confer with a Miami child custody lawyer to discuss your options.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the parties were married for seven years before the wife filed a petition for dissolution. The couple had a daughter during their marriage that was diagnosed with autism. They resolved most of their issues via a marital settlement agreement and had a hearing to resolve the remaining matters, like child support, parental responsibility, and their daughter’s schooling.

Allegedly, the wife had homeschooled the daughter, who was now eight years old, since she was four and wanted to continue homeschooling, while the father wanted her to attend public school. The trial court determined that it was in the daughter’s best interest to attend public school and issued an order to that effect. The mother appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

There are different types of alimony the Florida courts can award in divorce proceedings, including permanent alimony. Permanent alimony is not as permanent as the name suggests but can be adjusted if a court finds that a modification is warranted. The court will only grant a modification if there is evidence that it is necessary due to a change in circumstances that is both material and substantial, however, as demonstrated in a recent Florida case. If you have questions regarding alimony or the financial ramifications of divorce, it is smart to confer with a knowledgeable Miami divorce attorney as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the wife filed a petition to modify the periodic payment of permanent alimony awarded to the husband via a marital settlement agreement that was adopted by the trial court as part of the parties’ divorce judgment. Specifically, she requested that the court impute income to the husband based on the fact that he was eligible to receive Social Security benefits, even though he had not applied for such benefits. The court denied her petition, finding that she failed to adequately prove that there had been a material and substantial change in either her or the husband’s circumstances that warranted a modification. The wife then appealed.

Grounds for Modifying Alimony Awards

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court ruling. In doing so, it stated that pursuant to established case law, a trial court cannot impute the value of Social Security benefits that a person is eligible to receive but has not yet applied for as income to a person if they offer evidence showing that their decision to defer the benefits is merely a prudent investment strategy, as their benefits will increase if they do not take them until a later date. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

It is not uncommon for a couple to take a practical view of marriage and enter into prenuptial agreements prior to their wedding. Florida courts will typically enforce prenuptial agreements entered into in Florida as long as they were executed in accordance with Florida law. It is not always immediately evident, however, if foreign prenuptial agreements should be upheld. Recently, a Florida court issued an opinion discussing the analysis that must be conducted to determine whether foreign prenuptial agreements are enforceable. If you have questions regarding how a divorce could impact your financial rights and obligations, it is in your best interest to contact a Miami divorce lawyer as soon as possible.

History of the Case

It is reported that the husband and the wife married in Quebec in July 1992. Prior to marrying, they entered into a prenuptial agreement (foreign prenuptial agreement). The agreements stated, among other things, that they adopted the separate property regime set forth by the terms of the Civil Code of the Province of Quebec and that they would pay for any marital expenses in proportion to their respective capabilities.

Allegedly, the parties maintained separate accounts throughout their marriage. They became residents of Florida in 2009. Ten years later, the wife instituted a petition for dissolution of the marriage in which she requested alimony and equitable distribution in accordance with Florida law. In the husband’s response to the petition, he asserted that they largely had separate rather than marital assets and argued that the foreign prenuptial agreement should govern the distribution of any marital property. The case proceeded to trial, after which the court found that the marital residences purchased by the husband were subject to equitable distribution. The husband appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In divorce matters involving children, the courts will generally issue orders establishing the parties’ timesharing and parental responsibility rights. In doing so, the courts’ sole concern is what is in the best interest of the divorcing couples’ children. As such, custody orders are not easily disturbed, and a parent typically must show a significant change in circumstances to obtain a modification. Recently, a Florida court issued an order discussing what constitutes a change that is substantial enough to warrant an alteration of custody rights, in a matter in which the father appealed the denial of his petition for modification. If you need assistance with a custody matter, it is smart to speak to a capable Miami child custody lawyer to evaluate your options.

History of the Case

Allegedly, the husband and the wife had two children together, born in 2010 and 2012. They divorced in 2015, and the final judgment of dissolution granted them shared parental responsibility and equal timesharing. Shortly after the divorce, the wife began a relationship with another man. In 2018, the husband filed a petition for modification of the final judgment, seeking a change in timesharing and parental responsibility due to the wife’s harassment of the husband, domestic violence incidents between the wife and the boyfriend, and the wife’s interference with the husband’s custody rights.

Reportedly, the magistrate determined the husband demonstrated a significant change in circumstances, noting that the children were temporarily removed from the wife’s care in 2017 and that there was a significant history of domestic violence between the wife and the boyfriend. Thus, he recommended that the husband be named as the ultimate decision maker on issues pertaining to the children’s health and education and to amend the timesharing to grant the wife visitation every other weekend. The wife filed exceptions to the magistrate’s report and recommendations, which the circuit court granted. The husband then appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Typically, when a party is ordered to pay child support, the obligation lasts until the child receiving the support turns eighteen. In some instances, however, the obligation can extend past the age of majority. Recently, a Florida court discussed the grounds for extending a support obligation in a case in which the plaintiff sought support from her father due to her disabilities. If you are a Miami resident dealing with a dispute over child support obligations, it is advisable to consult a knowledgeable Miami family law attorney to discuss what steps you can take to fight to protect your rights.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, who was twenty-seven years old, filed a petition seeking child support from her father. The plaintiff had Down Syndrome, which prevented her from obtaining and maintaining gainful employment. When her parents divorced, her father was ordered to pay child support until the plaintiff turned eighteen, but since that time, she relied on her mother for financial support.

Allegedly, the defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s petition, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction over the matter. He further alleged that there was no provision in the order dissolving his marriage that allowed the plaintiff to seek support, and no continued support was sought while the plaintiff was a minor. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion. The plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. She then appealed.

Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

It is not uncommon in divorce actions for the parties to develop a marital settlement agreement, which is essentially a contract that sets forth their rights and obligations, or for the court to incorporate the agreement into the final judgment that dissolves the marriage. If a party refuses to comply with the terms of a marital settlement agreement, however, a dispute may arise as to whether an action to enforce the agreement is subject to the statute of limitations that applies to contracts or the one that applies to judgments. Recently, a Florida court addressed this issue in a case in which the wife waited almost twenty years to file a motion to enforce a divorce judgment. If your spouse refuses to comply with the terms of your marital settlement agreement, it is advisable to contact a seasoned Miami divorce attorney to assess your rights and your options for seeking enforcement.

Factual Background

It is alleged that the husband and the wife entered into a marital settlement agreement in 1997. The agreement divided their marital property, business assets, and debts and dictated that the husband was to pay the wife close to half a million dollars, either in a lump sum or in five principal payments, plus interest, which were due each year beginning in 2001. The agreement was incorporated into the final judgment dissolving the marriage, which was issued in April 1997.

It is reported that the husband failed to make any payments as required under the agreement, however. Then, in 2017, one day shy of the twentieth anniversary of the entry of the divorce judgment, the wife filed a motion to enforce the judgment. The court granted the motion and ordered the husband to pay close to one million dollars to the wife based on the amount of principal payments plus accrued interest. The husband appealed, arguing that the wife’s motion was barred by the statute of limitations. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

It is not uncommon for family court hearings to be conducted in front of a magistrate judge in Florida. If parties do not agree with the recommendations set forth in the magistrate’s report they can file exceptions, but in many cases, the magistrate’s recommendations will be adopted regardless. This was demonstrated in a recent Florida case involving the enforcement of a martial settlement agreement, in which an appellate court affirmed an order denying a husband and wife’s exceptions to the report of a magistrate. If you wish to end your marriage or need assistance with another family law matter, it is advisable to seek the counsel of a Miami divorce attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural History

The wife filed a petition to dissolve the marriage in 2012. They entered into a marital settlement agreement which was filed with the court and their divorce was finalized later that year. In 2017, the wife filed a motion to enforce provisions of the agreement pertaining to health insurance and life insurance. The trial court referred the matter to a magistrate, who conducted two hearings and then issued a report setting forth recommendations. The husband and wife both filed exceptions to the report but the trial court entered an order denying them. The husband and wife both appealed.

Magistrate Authority in Divorce Cases

On appeal, the husband argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to enforce the agreement because the divorce judgment did not expressly incorporate the agreement or order the parties to comply with same. The appellate court rejected this argument noting that the agreement provided that it could be enforced by the court and that courts inherently retain jurisdiction to enforce their orders. The husband further argued that the wife’s action was actually in the nature of a modification and should have been conducted via a supplemental petition. The appellate court rejected this argument as well. Continue reading ›

by
Posted in: Divorce
Published on:
Updated:

Published on: | by

The Florida courts typically strive to protect the parent-child relationship, and will generally attempt to keep the relationship intact. The courts’ main directive in any custody case is determining an outcome that is in the best interest of the child involved, however, and if it requires terminating parental rights, it will. Recently, a Florida court addressed the issue of when the termination of parental rights is appropriate, in a matter in which the father argued that the court could have employed less restrictive means to protect the child’s interests. If your parental rights are in jeopardy, it is essential that you confer with a Miami child custody attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is reported that the trial court held a hearing to determine whether to terminate the father’s parental rights. The court noted that the child was born addicted to amphetamines and had lived with his maternal grandparents since birth. The father was incarcerated and had been since before the child was born and did not know the mother was pregnant prior to the child’s birth. Additionally, he repeatedly questioned whether he was the child’s biological father and suggested that, upon his release in 2025 or 2026, he could do a DNA test to establish if was the child’s father. The court found it in the child’s best interest to terminate the father’s rights. The father appealed.

The Least Restrictive Means Requirement in Termination of Parental Rights Cases

On appeal, the father argued that his due process rights were violated and that the termination of parental rights was not the least restrictive means to protect the child. The appellate court disagreed. Continue reading ›

01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08