Divorce

Florida Court Refuses to Hear Family Law Case Best Litigated in New Jersey

Published on: December 30, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

A couple’s out-of-state divorce order was the starting point of multistate legal battles spanning more than a decade. The battle between the two former spouses highlights some of the challenges that occur when parties to a divorce move away from the state that originally handled their case. The 4th District Court of Appeal upheld a dismissal of a husband’s Florida legal action related to the divorce because the couple’s previous home state of New Jersey was actually the proper place to bring his claims.

The long-running contest began after a New Jersey court issued an order granting a divorce to a couple, and giving the wife awards for unpaid alimony and child support. The court also ordered that certain pieces of the husband’s property be placed into a trust and gave the wife the authority to sell those assets in the trust. If necessary, the wife had the power to satisfy the child support and alimony debts from the sale of the husband’s trust assets.
Continue reading ›

Broward Judge Grants Florida’s First Ever Same-Sex Divorce

Published on: December 17, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

A Broward Circuit Judge’s order on December 17 granted to a South Florida art dealer something she sought for more than a year: a divorce. What made the judge’s in-court ruling groundbreaking was that the woman sought a divorce from her lesbian partner, with whom she had entered into a civil union in 2002. The ruling represents the first time a Florida court has issued a divorce to a same-sex couple and comes on the heels of a December 8 ruling, issued in the same case, declaring Florida’s ban on same-sex marriages unconstitutional and unenforceable, the Miami Herald reported.

The former couple entered into a civil union in Vermont 12 years ago. In 2010, one partner allegedly became unfaithful and, shortly thereafter, disappeared. In order for the other partner to marry her new partner, she needed to obtain a divorce. In a similar case involving a Tampa couple, the lesbian couple married in Massachusetts but could not get a Massachusetts divorce because neither was a resident there by the time they decided to part ways. In the present case, she could not obtain a Vermont dissolution because Vermont law requires a signed affidavit from her partner, and she no longer knew the partner’s whereabouts.
Continue reading ›

Appropriate Alimony Awards and the Length of Your Marriage

Published on: December 10, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

When faced with the possibility of awarding alimony, courts have a variety of options. The appropriate option may depend on various factors, including how long you were married. Whether you are the spouse paying alimony or the one receiving alimony, it is very important to understand what the law does (and does not) allow courts to do when it comes to an alimony award. Two Florida appeals court decisions from this year serve as examples of these limitations.

In a very recent decision, Diaz v. Diaz, the 3d District Court of Appeal ruled in favor of a husband’s appeal and overturned a trial court’s ruling with regard to the husband’s payment of alimony. The trial court in that case ordered the husband to pay the wife durational (temporary) alimony each month for 48 months. The flaw with this award was that the couple’s marriage had only lasted for a little more than three years (40 months.) Section 61.08(7) of the Florida Statutes says that durational alimony “may not be modified except under exceptional circumstances and may not exceed the length of the marriage.”
Continue reading ›

Alimony Not Proper If Spouse Lacks the Ability to Pay

Published on: November 17, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

Sometimes, courts decide to award alimony to one spouse in a divorce based on that spouse having a much smaller income than the other spouse. The 2d District Court of Appeal received a case like this and reversed the trial court’s ruling requiring the husband to pay alimony. That’s because evidence of income disparity alone is not enough to justify an alimony award. The law requires proof of the recipient spouse’s need and the payor spouse’s ability to pay. The evidence in the case showed the husband did not have the ability to pay, so awarding alimony was erroneous.

M’s family law case was one similar to many people’s situations. While married, M and his now-former wife, T, had a child. They also reportedly racked up a considerable amount of debt, including credit card balances exceeding $10,000. Eventually, the couple decided to dissolve their marriage. By the time they split up, each spouse was in a very problematic financial state, since each had debt obligations allegedly exceeding their incomes.
Continue reading ›

Deciding Where a Divorce and Child Custody Case Should (or Can) Be Litigated

Published on: November 3, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

A woman who took her child and fled an allegedly abusive husband was unable to successfully move her divorce and child custody case to a court in her new home in South Florida. The 1st District Court of Appeal, while openly expressing sympathy for the woman’s difficult position, threw out an order transferring the case from Tallahassee to Miami-Dade County because, when the original divorce petition was filed, the couple had only lived in Tallahassee, making that location the only permissible place where the case could be heard.

The case regarded the difficult and allegedly violent breakup of the marriage of KM (husband) and TM (wife). The husband filed for divorce in September 2013 in Tallahassee, where the couple was living with their child. Shortly thereafter, a dispute reportedly erupted between the couple, and the husband allegedly punched the wife several times. The wife left Tallahassee and went to stay with her mother in Miami. The wife obtained a domestic violence injunction against the husband from a court in Miami-Dade County.
Continue reading ›

Divorce Order Fails Due to Use of ‘Verbatim’ Proposed Order, Complete with Awards Not Requested in Petition

Published on: October 27, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

Parties in divorce cases will, in many instances, submit proposed final orders to the trial judge. A recent 5th District Court of Appeal ruling serves as a reminder that, although these submissions are permissible and often helpful to trial judges, courts should be hesitant to adopt them in their entirety when the opposing side has no opportunity to comment or object. Additionally, parties are not entitled to forms of relief they didn’t ask for in their petitions, even if they raised the issues in their pre-trial documents.

The recent case involved CC’s filing for divorce from her husband, DC. The wife’s petition asked the court to dissolve the marriage, create a time sharing schedule for the couple’s child, award child support, and distribute the couple’s assets and liabilities.
Continue reading ›

Marital Settlement Agreement Puts Husband on Hook for Permanent Alimony, Even After Wife Remarries

Published on: October 6, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

There are many reasons a divorcing spouse might sign off on a marital settlement agreement when one or more terms are less favorable than what that spouse would receive if the agreement followed the Florida Statutes. Whatever the reasons, a person in such a situation should be extremely careful when signing such an agreement because, as long as the language in the document is clear, courts will follow the agreement’s terms, as one recent 2d District Court of Appeal case demonstrates.

The case arose from the divorce of a Florida couple. After mediation, the couple came to terms on a marital settlement agreement. In that document, the husband agreed to pay the wife $4,500 per month in alimony. The alimony paragraph stated that the amount was non-modifiable and payable for the life of the wife.
Continue reading ›

Alimony That Requires Wife to Dip into Assets to Pay Monthly Expenses is Too Low, Appeals Court Says

Published on: September 10, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

Alimony can serve as an important lifeline, especially for divorcing spouses who subsist on fixed incomes. A recent 5th District Court of Appeal ruling highlights the basic concept of alimony law in Florida, saying that alimony must be large enough to allow the recipient spouse to meet her living expenses without having to spend her assets just to pay her monthly bills. In the 5th DCA’s recent decision, it sent a divorce case back to the trial court after deciding that the alimony imposed on the husband would not be enough to meet the wife’s monthly expenses.

The divorce in question regarded the 12-year marriage of a Florida couple. The couple achieved a partial settlement agreement of their financial affairs through mediation. The agreement called for the husband to refinance the marital residence and give the wife $4,000 from the proceeds of that transaction.

On the matter of alimony, the couple could not agree. The wife put forth evidence to the trial court that she was disabled and unable to work, and that she received $1,189 per month in disability payments as her sole source of income. She also testified that, in order to secure a home comparable to the marital residence, she would have to pay approximately $850 per month. The trial judge ultimately awarded the wife bridge-the-gap alimony of $300 a month for two years. The judge, in arriving at these numbers, expressly factored in the $4,000 the wife would receive from the refinance transaction.
Continue reading ›

Court OKs $100 Bond for Injunction that Froze $3 Million in Assets

Published on: August 26, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

A wife successfully managed to obtain a freeze of $3 million of her husband’s assets while posting an injunction bond of only $100. The 3d District Court of Appeal upheld this low bond because Florida’s courts were in the position only of enforcing an order in an underlying divorce case situated in Argentina, which meant that the Florida courts should defer to the Argentinian rule, which disfavors imposing bonds on the economically weaker spouse in a divorce.

A woman filed for divorce from her husband in Buenos Aires, Argentina in 2011. Both were Argentinian citizens and residents, but the wife claimed that the husband held some money in bank accounts in Miami. The court in Argentina issued an order freezing half the funds in those accounts and seeking the aid of the American courts in enforcing that order.

The wife then went to the Circuit Court in Miami and succeeded in obtaining a temporary injunction to freeze the accounts. The court required the wife to pay a bond as part of the injunction process, but it set that amount at only $100. The husband asked the court to increase the amount of the bond, claiming that the injunction froze roughly $3 million in assets and that $100 was too small an amount. The court held a hearing but declined to increase the bond. The Circuit Court concluded that its role was nothing more than one of enforcement of the Argentinian order under the principal of comity, which means the recognition of legal rulings from an outside state or country.
Continue reading ›

Failure to Foster Relationship with Child’s Father Not Grounds for Mandating Psych Evaluation of Mother

Published on: August 19, 2014 | by Sandy T. Fox

Psychological and physical evaluations can be important tools for courts as they analyze a parent’s fitness. The law, however, also maintains several hurdles on the permissibility of such examinations because of their invasive nature. The case before a court must implicate the parent’s mental or physical condition, and the parent must be on notice of the potential of an evaluation before the court may order such a step. In a recent case from southwest Florida, a mother’s appeal allowed her to escape such an evaluation when the 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled that her case did not meet either of the required criteria.

As part of one couple’s divorce, the court awarded primary residential custody to the mother and issued a time-sharing order. At a hearing in late October 2013, the court discovered that the father had not seen his daughter in more than four months. The father expressed his desire to see his child, but he also stated that he did not want to force his daughter to visit him.

The trial court assumed that if the mother was supportive of maintaining the child’s relationship with her father, the visits would be occurring in accordance with the time-sharing order. As a result, the court ordered the mother to undergo a psychological evaluation, but it made no findings of fact as part of the order. The mother appealed.
Continue reading ›