Fort Lauderdale Divorce Lawyer Blog
Divorce cases involving businesses, marital homes, and child support often hinge on the sufficiency of financial evidence. Florida trial courts are tasked with weighing competing affidavits, financial statements, and testimony to arrive at equitable outcomes. A recent opinion issued by a Florida court highlights how appellate courts defer to trial courts when the record demonstrates competent, substantial evidence supporting the trial court’s decisions. If you are involved in a Florida divorce proceeding, a Miami family law attorney can help protect your financial interests and ensure that proper valuations are used in your case.
Case Setting
It is reported that the husband petitioned for dissolution of marriage, and the wife filed a counter-petition. Following a contested trial, the trial court entered a final judgment dissolving the marriage and addressing the division of marital property, child support, and related financial matters.
Allegedly, the wife challenged three key determinations in the final judgment. First, he disputed the trial court’s valuation of his business, a food company that both parties agreed was marital property. Second, he argued that the trial court erred in calculating his monthly income for purposes of child support and alimony. Third, he contended that the court improperly valued the marital home at an amount lower than his own assessment.
It is further reported that in valuing the business, the trial court deducted the wife’s salary to determine net income and then added that salary back into the calculation, reaching a total valuation exceeding $120,000. The wife argued that his salary constituted personal goodwill, which should not be considered part of the business valuation. However, no expert testimony or independent evidence was presented to establish the existence or value of goodwill.
It is alleged that the trial court also addressed the wife’s income by examining his profit and loss statements. While he claimed that certain support payments came from his personal bank account, the trial court determined that the payments were accounted for as a separate business expense. The court concluded that the payments should be included in his income calculations.
Finally, it is reported that the marital home was valued at $400,000, based on the husband’s recent financial affidavit. The wife offered an earlier affidavit valuing the home at $480,000, but this affidavit had been submitted nearly two years before the judgment. The trial court determined that the more current valuation was the fairer measure.
Determining Income and Asset Valuation
On review, the court explained that trial courts possess broad discretion in fashioning equitable distribution schemes, provided that their findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence. With respect to the business valuation, the appellate court noted that the trial court appeared to use the seller’s discretionary earnings method, which allows the addition of owner’s compensation back into net income. Because the record contained calculations and testimony supporting this approach, the court found no abuse of discretion.
Regarding the wife’s income, the appellate court emphasized that the source of funds, whether from a personal account or a business account, was not the critical issue. What mattered was whether the support payments were properly recorded as business expenses or salary. The trial court relied on the profit and loss statements, which reflected the payments as a separate cost of goods sold item. That record evidence justified the inclusion of the payments in the wife’s income for support purposes.
As to the marital home, the appellate court upheld the trial court’s reliance on the more recent financial affidavit. Under Florida Statutes section 61.075(7), trial judges have discretion to select valuation dates that are just and equitable under the circumstances. The court observed that using an older valuation without explanation would have been less equitable. Accordingly, the trial court’s reliance on a newer, more current valuation was proper.
In affirming the judgment in all respects, the appellate court underscored that its role is not to reweigh evidence or substitute its judgment for that of the trial court, but only to ensure that the lower court’s findings are supported by the record.
Talk to a Trusted Miami Divorce Attorney
Dividing marital assets in a divorce requires careful financial analysis and strict adherence to Florida law. If you are navigating a divorce that involves a business, real property, or child support disputes, working with an experienced attorney is essential. At The Law Offices of Sandy T. Fox, P.A., our Miami divorce attorneys represent clients in complex property division and support cases. We can help protect your interests, present the necessary evidence, and ensure that your financial future is safeguarded. Call us today at 800-596-0579 or contact us online to schedule a confidential consultation. We serve clients throughout Miami and South Florida.