Articles Posted in Divorce

Published on: | by

Many people take the practical measure of entering into prenuptial agreements prior to marrying. If their marriage ends in divorce, a party that consented to the terms of a prenuptial agreement cannot then attempt to evade them by arguing that they are vague or that the court lacks a basis for enforcing the provisions of the agreement. Rather, as shown in an opinion recently issued by a Florida court, if a court grants a party spousal support, in part due to the terms of a prenuptial agreement, it can be challenging to show that its decision constitutes an abuse of discretion. If you intend to marry and question whether you should execute a prenuptial agreement, it is smart to talk to a Miami family law attorney as soon as possible.

The Agreement in Question

It is alleged that the parties married in 2009. Shortly before marrying, they entered into a prenuptial agreement. They then separated in 2016, and in 2018 the wife filed a petition for dissolution and asked the court to enforce the prenuptial agreement. The court granted the wife temporary spousal support and post-dissolution spousal support. The husband appealed, arguing in part that the court abused its discretion in ordering him to pay temporary spousal support.

Demonstrating a Court Abused its Discretion in Granting Spousal Support

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court’s ruling. The court noted that the prenuptial agreement provided that in the event the parties separated and filed a petition for dissolution, the husband was to pay the wife temporary support in the amount of $3,000 per month until the court issued a final judgment of dissolution. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Under Florida law, while marital property is subject to equitable distribution in a divorce action, separate property is not; instead, it remains the property of the spouse to whom it belongs. Challenges in determining the nature of property can arise, however, when a party mingles separate and marital assets, as illustrated in a recent Florida divorce action in which the parties disagreed over whether a boat was a marital asset subject to equitable distribution. If you wish to seek a divorce, it is prudent to talk to a Miami divorce lawyer to determine how the end of your marriage may impact your property rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the husband and the wife were married for eighteen years. After the court issued a final judgment of dissolution, the wife filed an appeal, arguing in part that the trial court erred in determining that a boat was the husband’s separate property for the purposes of equitable distribution.

Separate Versus Marital Property

On appeal, the court adopted the wife’s reasoning and reversed the trial court ruling. The court noted that the trial court determined that the boat in question was the husband’s separate property because the husband paid for it with funds he received from his father’s trust. The wife argued, however, that the husband could not prove that the boat was a separate asset because it was bought with money that was commingled with marital funds in the couple’s joint bank account. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida, the courts look unkindly at one party deliberately wasting community assets during a divorce or the downfall of a marriage. As such, if they find that one party has dissipated marital assets, it may negatively impact their property rights in the context of a divorce. In a recent Florida ruling, a court analyzed whether the cost of one party’s lawsuit filed prior to divorce constituted dissipation, ultimately ruling that it did not. If you or your spouse want to end your marriage, it is in your best interest to meet with a skilled Miami divorce attorney.

Background of the Case

It is reported that in 2015, the husband was fired for cause by his employer. After his termination, the employer ordered the husband to repay the bonus he received pursuant to his employment contract. The husband declined and filed a lawsuit against the employer. Ultimately, judgment was entered against the husband. He satisfied the judgment against him using marital assets.

It is alleged that the wife filed for divorce two years later. For purposes of equitable distribution, the court found that the husband engaged in misconduct at work and used marital property to pay the judgment against him without the wife’s consent or knowledge. Thus, it found that it constituted misconduct and assigned it to the husband and reduced the amount of assets he received via equitable distribution. The husband appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida, parties have the right to seek alimony in divorce actions. The courts will only award alimony if it is warranted under the circumstances, however. Further, the courts may amend an alimony award if the circumstances that merited alimony change. Recently, a Florida court examined whether a temporary change in employment constituted a change that warranted a reduction in alimony, ultimately ruling that it did not. If you have questions about your alimony and property rights in a Florida divorce, it is wise to talk to a knowledgeable Miami divorce lawyer.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is alleged that the parties were married for twenty years. In 2013, they divorced. The trial court entered a final dissolution of the marriage that incorporated the parties’ mediated agreement. Under the terms of the agreement, the husband agreed to pay the wife permanent alimony in the amount of $13,500 each month.

It is reported that in 2020, the husband sought a modification of alimony. He asserted several grounds in support of his request, including the wife’s reported increase in earning ability. During a hearing on the matter, testimony was offered indicating that during 2020 and 2021, the wife obtained temporary part-time employment, during which she earned approximately $20 per hour and worked five to ten hours per week. Her employment ended shortly before the hearing. The trial court granted the request, and the wife appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Under Florida law, any community property is subject to equitable division by the courts in a divorce action. Typically, pension benefits and any other retirement benefits accrued during a marriage constitute community property. Additionally, parties are entitled division of cost of living adjustments under Florida law as well. Recently, a Florida court clarified whether a party that is awarded a portion of a spouse’s pension in a deferred retirement option program  (DROP) is entitled to a cost of living adjustment, even if the DROP account is not created until after the divorce is final. If you want to learn more about how ending your marriage may impact you financially, it is in your best interest to speak to a Miami divorce attorney promptly.

Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the husband and the wife married in 1999. In 2014, the husband filed for divorce. The following year, the court entered a final judgment of divorce that included provisions regarding the equitable distribution of the husband’s pension with the state retirement system. The provisions stated, in part, that the marital estate was distributed equally between the parties and that a QDRO must be prepared with regard to the husband’s retirement pension.

Allegedly, the court entered a QRDO that awarded the wife half of the husband’s retirement benefits that accrued from the date of the marriage to the date the divorce action was filed, to be taken as a deduction from each monthly benefit payable to the husband from the pension plan. One of the paragraphs of the QDRO provided for a proportionate share of any cost of living adjustment the husband received. The husband objected to the cost of living adjustment at the trial level. He then appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

While courts typically conducted family law hearings in person prior to 2020, since the COVID-19 pandemic, many proceedings have been held via video-teleconferencing. Regardless of whether hearings are conducted in person or over the internet, parties impacted by such hearings have certain rights, and if the court violates their rights, any rulings issued during the proceeding may be reversed. This was demonstrated recently in a Florida opinion issued in a divorce case in which the court ruled that the trial court infringed on the wife’s due process rights by ruling on matters in her absence. If you or your spouse wish to end your marriage, it is important to understand your rights and obligations, and you should talk to a Miami divorce attorney promptly.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the husband and wife married in 2002 and had two minor children. They subsequently divorced, and in 2016, the trial court entered a final judgment dissolving their marriage. The trial court also appointed a parenting coordinator and guardian ad litem to help resolve other issues. The parties later filed multiple post-dissolution motions, seeking enforcement of the final judgment, contempt, and psychological evaluations.

Allegedly, the court scheduled a hearing for June 2021 to address certain financial issues. The court conducted the hearing over Zoom and, prior to commencing, confirmed it would only cover the issues previously indicated. The trial court stated it was going to order the wife to pay her share of the children’s tuition, after which she logged off. She logged back on ten minutes later, only to log off again when the court restated its intent. The court later ordered the wife to pay the husband the cost of the parenting coordinator’s fees in the wife’s absence. The wife appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Courts presiding over Florida family law cases will often make oral pronouncements regarding their decisions on disputed issues during hearings and later reduce the terms of their pronouncement to writing. Issues can arise, however, when a written order issued by a court conflicts with its earlier oral pronouncement. In such cases, as explained in a recent Florida ruling issued in a divorce matter, the oral pronouncement will generally prevail. If you or your spouse intend to file a petition for dissolution, it is wise to meet with a Miami divorce attorney to determine what measures you can take to protect your interests.

History of the Case

It is reported that the husband and the wife divorced in 2018. The year prior to their divorce, they filed a joint income tax return and received a refund in excess of $150,000. The refund, which was deposited into the wife’s attorney’s trust account, included a credit for overpayment carried over from the husband’s and wife’s previous joint return.

Allegedly, during an evidentiary hearing, the husband argued he was entitled to half of the credit for overpayment on the grounds that it was marital property subject to equitable distribution. The trial court agreed and orally granted the husband half of the overpayment. In the written order it issued on the matter, though, the trial court allocated all of the money in the wife’s attorney’s trust account to other parts of the entitlement award. The husband appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by issuing a written order that conflicted with its oral pronouncement. Continue reading ›

by
Posted in: Divorce
Published on:
Updated:

Published on: | by

It is a common practice for the Florida courts to issue orders in family law cases that impose obligations to pay child support or alimony. Additionally, to ensure that such obligations are upheld, the courts must issue a separate income withholding order. Recently, a Florida court discussed income withholding orders in a matter in which the wife objected to the trial court vacating an existing income withholding order. If you have questions concerning alimony, it is wise to confer with a dedicated Miami divorce attorney as soon as possible.

Facts of the Underlying Case

It is reported that the wife and husband divorced, and the court ordered the husband to pay alimony. In 2021, the husband moved for a modification of his obligation. The court granted the husband’s motion and issued an amended income withholding order. The wife appealed the trial court’s ruling, arguing that it erred by issuing the order without notice or granting her an opportunity to be heard. As the appeal was pending, the trial court vacated the income withholding order but did not enter a new order. The wife asserted that this was improper under Florida law as well. The husband did not pay any alimony during the pendency of the appeal.

Income Withholding Orders in Florida Family Law Cases

The court noted that the wife’s reasoning was correct and remanded the matter to the trial court, directing it to enter a new income withholding order. In its opinion, the court noted that the trial court was mandated to do so by Florida Statutes. Specifically, the law dictates that when entering an order establishing, modifying, or enforcing an obligation for child support, alimony, or both, unless the order is temporary, the court must enter a separate order for income withholding unless one has already been entered. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Divorce can leave one party in a precarious financial situation. In many divorces, then, a person will seek alimony from their spouse. In evaluating whether alimony is warranted, the courts will look at not only if the party seeking alimony can demonstrate their need but also if the other party has the ability to pay. If either party’s economic circumstances change after a court enters an order granting alimony, the court may grant a modification. Recently, a Florida court discussed the factors considered in determining whether to terminate alimony in a case in which it upheld the trial court’s ruling. If you are considering ending your marriage and want to learn more about alimony, it is smart to meet with an experienced Miami divorce attorney.

Background of the Case

It is reported that the husband and wife divorced in 2008. Their marital settlement agreement was incorporated into the final judgment of divorce. Among other things, the agreement dictated that the husband was to pay the wife $3,000 in alimony per month until the wife remarried, the husband reached the age of 65, or either party died. It stated that the obligation could be modified, but an increase in the wife’s income did not constitute grounds for a modification.

Allegedly, the husband filed a petition for modification in 2016 after he lost his job. The wife filed a motion for enforcement and contempt, as the husband had ceased paying alimony when he was terminated. There was no activity in the case until 2019, when the wife filed a second motion. The husband then filed a second petition for modification or termination. The case proceeded to trial, after which the court found that the husband had demonstrated a substantial and material change in circumstances and suspended his obligation until his ability to pay was restored. The wife then appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Florida is an equitable distribution state, which means that in divorce actions, the courts have the authority to divide marital assets in a manner that they deem fair and just. Not all property acquired during a marriage is subject to equitable distribution, though, as shown in a recent Florida ruling. If you have questions about how ending your marriage may impact you financially, it is prudent to talk to a skilled Miami divorce lawyer as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the husband and wife divorced. In the final dissolution of judgment, the trial court ordered the husband to pay the wife $255 per month, which the court stated represented a portion of his “military retirement.” Five years after the divorce was final, the wife filed a motion for enforcement and contempt, arguing that the husband retired two years earlier but had not paid her any portion of his military retirement. The court granted the wife’s motion, and the husband appealed.

Assets Subject to Equitable Distribution

On appeal, the husband argued that he medically retired and that, therefore, the money he received represented military disability payments rather than retirement payments. He further noted that he did not meet the length of service requirement to receive retirement payments from the military. As such, he argued that the trial court erred in ordering him to make payments to the wife. Continue reading ›

Contact Information
19790 W Dixie Hwy #412
Miami, FL 33180
Toll Free: 800.596.0579Phone: 305.932.6542Fax: 305.932.6453

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2026, Sandy T. Fox, P.A.
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design