Articles Posted in Alimony

Published on: | by

In a recent Broward divorce case, the former husband appealed the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. He claimed that Broward Circuit Judge Alfred J. Horowitz entered a final judgment of dissolution of marriage that did not reflect a settlement agreement that was reached by the parties and subsequently announced on the record.

During the trial, the parties reached a settlement agreement which was announced on the record by the former wife’s counsel. The trial court ensured that both parties had discussed the terms and conditions with their lawyer, had their respective questions answered and were entering into the agreement freely and voluntarily. Next, the trial court instructed the lawyers to submit a proposed final judgment of dissolution of marriage reflecting the agreement announced in open court. Counsel for the former wife moved for the entry of a final judgment of dissolution of marriage when the former husband had retained new counsel, Sandy T. Fox, Esquire, who objected to the former wife’s proposed final judgment of dissolution of marriage.

At the hearing several weeks later, the former husband’s new Fort Lauderdale divorce attorney, Sandy T. Fox, Esquire, argued that the former wife’s proposed final judgment of dissolution of marriage did not reflect to the oral stipulation announced on the record. Specifically, Mr. Fox disagreed with the proposed final judgment of dissolution of marriage as it related to the duration of alimony, child support award, equitable distribution of the marital residence and the payment of attorney’s fees and costs. Judge Horowitz instructed the Broward divorce attorneys to submit a proposed final judgment of dissolution of marriage in accordance with the settlement agreement that was announced in open court.

After receiving a letter from Mr. Fox that objected to the former wife’s proposed final judgment of dissolution of marriage along with the former husband’s proposed final judgment of dissolution of marriage, the trial court adopted the former wife’s proposed final judgment of dissolution without any changes whatsoever.

The settlement agreement provided for durational alimony of $1,000 per month but did not specify that it would continue for ten years, a period of time unilaterally selected by the former wife. As such, the final judgment of dissolution of marriage was remanded for the trial court to consider the duration of alimony and make findings consistent with section 61.08, Florida Statutes (2009).
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal has reversed a permanent periodic alimony and attorney fees award in a high profile divorce case. A Miami-Dade trial court awarded Nancy Loftus Quinones $14,135 in monthly alimony following her 2009 divorce from her husband of 18 years, ABC News correspondent John M. Quinones. At the time of the parties’ divorce, the former wife was reportedly largely unemployed for 18 years and the former husband earned more than $1 million per year. The couple also had two children who were attending private schools, one of whom was still a minor. Mr. Quinones reportedly voluntarily paid the private school tuition for both children.

At the time of the divorce, Mr. Quinones reportedly brought home more than $58,000 per month. He allegedly paid approximately $52,000 per year on college tuition and other payments for the couple’s adult son. Because the parties reportedly did not enter into a contractual agreement regarding the tuition payments, the trial court committed error when it considered the former husband’s voluntary payments for the couple’s adult child when determining the wife’s alimony award. This increased Mr. Quinones’ monthly expenses and reduced the amount of money he had available each month to pay alimony to his former wife.

Mrs. Quinones claimed she required $28,000 per month in order to maintain her current lifestyle. According to the Third District Court, the number was not unreasonable based on the parties’ lifestyle and her former husband’s income. Despite that no evidence was offered to refute the former wife’s financial claims, the trial court adjusted her alimony award downward. Consequently, the Third District Court of Appeal determined the trial court failed to properly take into account the standard of living the wife enjoyed prior to the couple’s divorce as required by Florida Statute.

The Third District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded the case for reconsideration of the permanent periodic alimony award. On remand, the trial court was ordered to disregard Mr. Quinones’ voluntary payment of tuition expenses for his adult child and to take into account the standard of living enjoyed by the parties prior to the dissolution of their marriage. Additionally, because there was nothing in the trial court record to demonstrate the former wife engaged in behavior to prolong litigation or inflate her attorney’s fees, the Court reversed the trial court’s costs award and remanded the issue for reconsideration. Finally, the Third District affirmed the trial court’s equitable distribution award.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Two bills passed by the Florida House died in the Senate as the legislative session ended on March 9th. House Bill 549 would have put an end to permanent alimony in the State of Florida. House Bill 1209 was designed to ban Florida courts from considering foreign or religious law in legal decisions. As the session ended, the Florida Senate chose not to call either bill to the floor for a vote. Proponents of both measures have vowed to reintroduce the proposed laws in the future.

A spokesperson for the Florida Alimony Reform group, Alan Frisher, expressed disappointment in the Senate’s failure to pass alimony reform during the recent legislative session. According to Frisher, current alimony laws promote extended periods of animosity between ex-spouses. He believes the state should instead focus on the length of a couple’s marriage as well as transitional alimony which would purportedly encourage both spouses to become self-sufficient. Frisher stated the organization will continue to fight to change the state’s allegedly antiquated alimony laws. The Family Law Section of the Florida Bar Association strongly opposed House Bill 549 and the organization’s head, David Manz, referred to the Florida Alimony Reform group as a vocal minority.

The Florida Senate also declined to vote on House Bill 1209, “Application of Foreign Law in Certain Cases.” Although the measure did not single out Islamic law, it was often referred to by critics as the the “anti-Sharia” bill. If re-elected, Senate sponsor Alan Hays of Umatilla plans on reintroducing the measure in the next legislative session. Opponents of the failed measure have stated such a law is unnecessary and expressed concern over the intent of the bill as well as its effect on family law matters such as divorce and child custody. According to Hays, the measure was simply designed to ensure United States law is the only law considered by Florida courts.

In Florida, a court may award alimony where there is a need on the part of the alimony receiver and an ability to pay on the part of the alimony payor. A needs assessment will examine the distribution of marital assets and the couple’s standard of living prior to the divorce. If the potential alimony receiver has the ability to maintain the same standard of living after all assets are distributed, a Florida court generally will not award alimony.

Each year, many Americans find themselves in the midst of divorce proceedings. Although the range of emotions associated with the end of a marriage can feel overwhelming, the financial damage can also be devastating. If you are faced with the dissolution of your marriage, contact a qualified divorce attorney to help you protect your interests. An experienced divorce lawyer will discuss your options with you and help you file your case.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In an 83-30 vote, the Florida House has passed Representative Ritch Workman’s bill designed to end permanent alimony in the state. House Bill 549 would not only prohibit new permanent alimony obligations in favor of long-term support orders, but it could also be applied retroactively to permanent alimony awards made in the past. This means Florida citizens currently paying permanent alimony would have the opportunity to reduce or eliminate spousal support obligations. The bill will now move on to the Florida Senate.

If the bill becomes law, it would reduce the length of time a court may award alimony payments to half of the length of the marriage absent additional written justification by a court outlining the need for a longer duration. It would also make it easier for those paying alimony to stop payments upon retirement and prohibit a court from ordering the paying spouse to live on a lower net income than the payee. Additionally, the law would prohibit a court from considering the income and assets of an alimony payer’s new spouse upon remarriage.

According to Florida Alimony Reform (FAR), a group that assisted in writing the bill, the law is necessary because current Florida alimony laws are unfair to men. 95 percent of divorced individuals paying alimony in the state are men and the financial burden of permanent alimony awards often prevent them from retiring. House Bill 549 was a compromise bill. FAR originally advocated for more sweeping alimony reforms.

The Florida Bar Association has publicly criticized the alimony bill and accused FAR of spreading misinformation. According to a press release written by David Manz of the Florida Bar Association’s Family Law Section, the proposed law is “far-reaching in magnitude and would have significant adverse and unintended consequences.” Although the Florida Bar reportedly agrees alimony reform is necessary, the organization claims FAR has exaggerated the purported lack of fairness in the current system. Manz also stated the Bar Association would support fair reform to Florida’s alimony laws.

In Florida, an alimony award is intended to maintain each spouse’s standard of living after a divorce. Because an award of alimony is contingent upon the financial needs of one spouse and the other’s ability to pay, alimony is not awarded in all circumstances. The length of the marriage also factors into any alimony awarded by a Florida court.

Although a permanent alimony award may be made at the discretion of a judge after a moderate or short-term marriage is dissolved, it 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. Florida courts are required to determine no other alimony award is “fair and reasonable under the circumstances,” before permanent alimony is awarded. For marriages which lasted between 7-17 years, there must be clear and convincing evidence permanent alimony is the appropriate award.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Last month, a Hillsborough County Circuit judge ordered the arrest of a successful Tampa area businessman, after he was found guilty of five counts of criminal contempt of court for failure to pay his child support and alimony obligations. The man reportedly failed to attend the contempt hearing where Judge Caroline Tesche sentenced him to almost six months in jail for repeatedly refusing to pay more than $6 million in alimony and child support.

The man’s ex-wife initiated divorce proceedings in 2009 and the former couple reached a final settlement agreement in July 2011. Although the couple has a 12-year-old son together, she stated her former husband has not supported them for several years. According to her attorney, the man now owes his ex-wife $10 million.

The man in this case is reportedly a decorated Vietnam veteran, a former president of a company, and previously ran a building materials business which allegedly reported profits of more than $4 million per month at its height. At one point, he reportedly owned a mansion and regularly drove several high end sports cars. Now, the man claims he is financially insolvent. In fact, he allegedly filed for bankruptcy just three days prior to the contempt hearing. Still, Judge Tesche believes the father has the ability to pay.

This man reportedly owns stock in several large companies as well as other assets. His attorney has argued that the man’s hands are tied as the former couple’s settlement agreement prohibits him from selling his stock in order to generate cash. He also claims the man is unable to liquidate any of his assets and lives off of loans and a small monthly Department of Veterans Affairs disability check.

According to the former wife, her ex-husband has the money and is merely hiding millions of dollars in assets from her. In November 2010, he spent more than two weeks in jail for refusing to produce documents during the couple’s divorce proceedings. When he filed for bankruptcy, the man reportedly estimated his assets as being in the range of $100 to $500 million and his liabilities at no more than $50 million. To further complicate the case, the Internal Revenue Service is also allegedly performing a criminal investigation into his affairs. His attorney has stated he is not aware of the man’s current location.

Each year many Florida residents find themselves in the midst of a less than amicable divorce. Understandably, the host of emotions associated with the end of a marriage can be overwhelming. The financial damage can oftentimes make a bad situation even worse. If you are contemplating divorce, you need an experienced family law attorney to help you protect your financial interests.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Florida lawmakers are currently considering a bill which would end permanent alimony awards following divorce. If passed by the Florida Legislature, House Bill 549 would base an award of alimony on the length of the divorcing parties’ marriage. For example, a marriage which lasted for 12 years would be eligible for a maximum alimony award of 12 years. The bill would also cap awards based on the payer’s income and allow payments to cease upon the payer’s retirement.

Earlier this month, the state legislature heard testimony in favor of House Bill 549 from members of the Florida Alimony Reform Group. A member of the group, Hector Torres, has also urged legislators to allow previous awards of permanent alimony to be revisited by courts. According to Torres, the state’s laws are behind the times and it is unfair he must pay alimony until his death after a marriage which lasted only 14 years.

Although the bulk of divorces across the nation involve some sort of alimony award, the money is generally provided to assist a spouse as he or she works to become self-supporting. Today, several states are changing their alimony laws in response to the fact that more spouses work outside of the home. This fall, Massachusetts placed new limits on the length of time alimony may be awarded by courts and ended alimony payments when the payer reaches retirement or the payee begins residing with another partner. Florida recently amended state alimony laws to provide awards solely after marriages of long term duration. Permanent awards now also require a court determination stating no other alimony option is fair or reasonable given the parties’ situation. New Jersey is currently considering legislation to limit alimony awards as well.

In Florida, two requirements must exist before a court will award alimony. They include a need on the part of the payee and an ability to pay on the part of the alimony payor. The first requirement takes into account the distribution of marital assets combined with the parties’ standard of living prior to the end of the marriage. If the potential payee can maintain the same standard of living after all assets are distributed, a court likely will not award alimony.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

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. Representative Workman reportedly filed the bill only eight days after his own divorce was finalized in Florida. Although alimony was reportedly 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 ›

Published on: | by

A legislator in Florida, Representative Ritch Workman, is attempting to repeal a state law which makes it illegal to cohabit with a party who is not a spouse. Specifically, “if any man or woman, not being married to each other, lewdly and lasciviously associate and cohabit together..they shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree”. This crime is currently punishable by 60 days in jail and a $500 fine.

Approximately 544,907 Floridians live in a relationship in violation of Florida law. This law is now viewed as both unenforceable and unrealistic. One advocate believes that there is a role for government to promote marriage instead of cohabitation. The rationale is that greater marriage rates have a lower likelihood of crime, less domestic violence and better educational results for children.

Individuals believe that there are governmental limitations in promoting marriage. Arresting individuals who live together is not realistic or fair. Many Floridians do not want to marry due to a prior Broward divorce which they experienced or lived through with their own parents.

Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Sootin v. Sootin, the former husband and former wife divorced in Miami-Dade in 1998. The former husband was obliged to pay the former wife permanent alimony. During 2008, the former husband sought to modify or terminate his alimony obligation. The former wife successfully moved to dismiss the petition since she now resided in Tennessee.

Next, the former husband moved to Tennessee and filed a petition to register and modify the divorce decree previously entered in Miami-Dade. After the former wife moved to dismiss the petition for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction in Tennessee, the Miami-Dade court, after consultation with the Tennessee Court, transfered the case to Tennessee. The former wife appealed this order.

In reversing the trial court’s transfer order, the Third District Court of Appeal held that the Miami divorce court erred in transferring the case to Tennessee. The court reasoned that Florida, under the Unified Interstate Family Support Act (hereinafter “UIFSA”), had continuing exclusive jurisdiction over the alimony order throughout the existence of the obligation.

Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

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.

Continue reading ›