Articles Posted in Divorce

Published on: | by

Broward Circuit Judge Susan F. Greenhawt, the present administrative judge of the unified family court, has notified Governor Rick Scott that she is retiring from her nine year tenure on the bench, effective June 30, 2012.

Divorce lawyers in Fort Lauderdale have been informed by Chief Circuit Judge Peter Weinstein that Circuit Judge Arthur Birken will step in and become the administrative judge of the unified family court. Judge Birken presently presides over marital and family law cases involving alimony, child support, time-sharing, parenting plans and paternity.

Judge Weinstein was surprised when Judge Greenhawt informed him in February of her plans to leave the bench and become a mediator. Judge Weinstein, along with many marital and family lawyers in Broward County, Florida, believe that Judge Greenhawt has displayed an extraordinary work ethic.

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

Last week, the Florida House passed a bill which would ban all courts in the state from considering foreign or religious law in legal decisions and contract disputes. Despite passionate opposition from a variety of religious activist groups as well as two Jewish lawmakers, House Bill 1209 passed with a vote of 92-24. Although approximately 50 witnesses were on hand Tuesday to provide statements against the bill, lawmakers chose not to allow their testimony and instead went straight to the floor for a vote.

Critics refer to House Bill 1209 as the “anti-Sharia” bill in reference to religious based Islamic law. Although the bill was passed by a wide margin, Representatives Jim Waldman of Coconut Creek and Elaine Schwartz of Hollywood strongly opposed the bill. Representative Schwartz stated thousands of her constituents wrote to her expressing their concern over the measure. Because the bill would ensure Florida law trumps religious or foreign law in family law cases such as divorce and child custody disputes, she also expressed worry regarding how the law would affect divorces mediated by Jewish tribunals.

The bill, titled “Application of Foreign Law in Certain Cases,” was sponsored by Representative Larry Metz of Eustis who stated the proposed law was designed to prevent Florida courts from upholding Islamic law as has recently occurred in other parts of the country. He also stated he believes the law is fair because it applies to every foreign and religious law equally. Representative Metz cited increasing economic internationalization as an additional factor behind the law. He sponsored a similar ball last year.

Carin Marie Porras, chair-elect of the Florida Bar Association’s Family Law Section, believes the proposed law impairs the rights of Florida citizens. She stated Florida courts do not currently consider foreign laws that contradict public policy. The law’s effect on divorce and family law has the potential to be widespread. Before the bill becomes law, it must be approved by the Florida Senate. An identical Senate Bill 1360 is now under consideration by state lawmakers.

Each year many Americans find themselves in the midst of divorce proceedings. The range of emotions associated with the end of a marriage can feel overwhelming. The financial damage that can accompany a divorce can also be devastating. If you find yourself faced divorce, you owe it to yourself to consult with a qualified divorce attorney to help you protect your financial and other interests. An experienced divorce attorney will discuss your options with you and help you file your case.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

The members of the bar and bench are mourning the death of Maxine Cohen Lando, a veteran Miami-Dade Circuit Judge who died today at Mount Sinai Medical Center from cholangiocarcinoma, a bile duct cancer. She was 61.

Since spring of 2011, Judge Lando had undergone surgery and chemotherapy. Her condition began to deteriorate when she fell at the courthouse in October 2011. She had been in the hospital since February 2012.

Judge Lando began her legal career 40 years ago at the Miami-Dade Public Defender’s office. She was an Assistant Public Defender from 1974 to 1985, where she served in the Felony Division, and was a Senior Trial Assistant for both the Juvenile Division and the Misdemeanor and Traffic Division.

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

This week, Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal declined to disqualify Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Maria Espinosa Dennis from a child custody case between two prominent area lawyers. After the two attorneys divorced in 2005, the former couple agreed to share custody of their two small children equally. Since that time, their relationship reportedly deteriorated so much so that the former wife, a law professor, asked Judge Espinosa Dennis to hold the former husband, a partner at a law firm, in contempt for allegedly violating provisions in their divorce agreement. According to the ex-wife, the ex-husband has continuously and repeatedly sent her abusive emails. The ex-wife also asked the judge to modify the former couple’s custody agreement.

Last November, the ex-husband filed a motion asking Judge Espinosa Dennis to recuse herself from the custody case after the law firm at which the ex-wife’s attorney is employed co-sponsored a fundraising event and donated $500 to Judge Espinosa Dennis’ re-election campaign. Judge Espinosa Dennis called the motion legally insufficient and denied his request. The former husband then appealed to Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal seeking her removal from the case. According to the ex-husband, it would be impossible for Judge Espinosa Dennis to treat him fairly due to the donations made to her campaign. Interestingly, the ex-husband’s own law firm also reportedly donated $500 to the judge’s re-election campaign last December.

The ex-wife’s appellate attorney argued that the ex-husband is simply unhappy with Judge Espinosa Dennis’ prior rulings against him. He also claims the former husband has continued the litigation in an attempt to drain his former wife’s financial resources. Because of this, the ex-wife asked the appellate court to award her approximately $100,000 in attorney’s fees. In a judgment which offered no legal reasoning except a citation to a 1991 Supreme Court of Florida case, a panel of Third District Court judges denied the ex-husband’s petition to remove Judge Espinosa Dennis from the case. Judges Richard J. Suarez, Judges Juan Ramirez Jr., and Vance E. Salter also provisionally approved the ex-wife’s request for legal fees.

Florida is a no-fault divorce state. If you have minor children, your final judgment of divorce will include a parenting plan and a custody arrangement, also called a time-sharing plan. Such a plan will outline which parent a child will spends holidays, overnights, and all other days with each week. If parents cannot agree on a time-sharing plan, one will be ordered by the court. The modification of a time-sharing plan can be difficult as a parent who is seeking modification must demonstrate changed circumstances justify the modification. If you are seeking to establish or modify your child’s time-sharing plan, a capable Broward County family law lawyer can assist you.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Last year, Okaloosa County, Florida created its first Unified Family Court in Crestview. Okaloosa County Circuit Judge Terry Ketchel was appointed to preside over the court. According to Ketchel, the court was set up to bring related domestic issues into the same courtroom before a single judge. He also stated civil cases concerning divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and juvenile delinquency make up almost half of all cases heard in the First Judicial District of Florida.

Terry Terrell, Chief Judge of the First Judicial Circuit, is committed to the Unified Family Court concept. Terrell, who was previously appointed to a Family Court Steering Committee by the Supreme Court of Florida, believes Crestview was a particularly well-suited location in which to begin the program. Although the Unified Family Court is still in its early stages, Okaloosa County officials hope to establish another location next year.

Judge Ketchel believes the new court provides judges with an opportunity to engage in better decision-making because it provides a judge with a better understanding of a family’s particular situation. He also stated prior to implementation of the new court, it was not uncommon for a single family to have multiple cases on the family law docket at any given time. The primary goal of the Unified Family Court is to protect children. According to Ketchel, “They’re not causing any of this, but they are dramatically impacted. Even the best of divorces is traumatic for children.”

Although there is no way to truly determine the success of the county’s new family court, employees at the Department of Children and Families in Northwest Florida support the concept. Additionally, Terrell believes the court has increased judicial efficiency and acts as an effective case management tool. It will be interesting to learn whether other Florida counties soon follow the new Okaloosa County family court model.

If you are faced with divorce or other stressful family law matters, you need an experienced attorney who is focused on family law to help you navigate the legal process. Whether or not you have legal counsel for marital and family law matters can make a huge difference in your future. A knowledgeable family law attorney can help.
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

Members of the baby-boom generation are increasingly choosing to divorce as they near retirement age. Although the overall U.S. divorce rate declined in recent years, divorce rates among adults aged 50 to 64 steadily increased. According to Susan L. Brown, co-director of the National Center for Family and Marriage Research at Bowling Green University, one in four divorces in this nation currently involve someone over the age of 50. In 1990, less than ten percent of divorces involved a spouse over age 50. That’s a dramatic increase from only twenty years ago.

As the boomer generation ages and reaches retirement, the related life transitions can be tough. Some couples who spent decades together find they must reconnect with one another on a new level. Retiring spouses often have a difficult time adjusting to life without a daily work routine. Spouses who previously stayed at home alone may also have a tough time as their routine is suddenly interrupted by the presence of another person in the home all day. Many marriages will survive the transition, but researchers say weak unions may shatter under the stress.

Research has shown the baby-boom generation has frequently engaged in a pattern of marriage at a young age, divorce, and subsequent remarriage. According to Brown, marriages in which at least one spouse has been married before are twice as likely to result in divorce later in life than those in which both spouses are in their first marriage. A divorce near retirement age can cause a huge financial strain on both parties as retirement accounts and other assets are split. Additional questions arise as many late life divorcees have no plans to remarry. According to Brown, this can result in societal challenges if baby boomers become ill or can no longer care for themselves because no spouse is present to provide care as with past generations. Choosing to remarry can also pose added legal obstacles if estate planning and inheritance matters are not planned well in advance.
Continue reading ›