Martindale-Hubbell
The National Advocates
The National Advocates
National Board of Trial Advocacy
The Florida Bar
Best Lawyers
Client Distinction Award
The National Advocates

Published on: | by

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. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

When former spouses return to court over alimony, the battles are often as much about procedure as they are about money. Florida courts frequently stress that trial judges must follow both statutory requirements and jurisdictional rules. A recent case from a Florida court demonstrates how crucial timing is in post-judgment alimony disputes. Even when a trial court attempts to move cases forward, its orders may be undone if they are entered before jurisdiction has returned from the appellate court. If you are seeking or opposing an alimony modification in Florida, a Miami family law attorney can help you navigate the process and protect your rights.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the former wife appealed a post-judgment order entered on September 12, 2023. That order reduced the former husband’s alimony obligation to $11,500 per month, required the former wife to pay over $400,000 in retroactive alimony, and granted the former husband a setoff that suspended his obligation until the repayment was made.

Allegedly, the case had already gone through earlier appeals. In a prior proceeding, the appellate court reversed an order modifying the former husband’s alimony obligation because the trial court failed to make the detailed findings required by Florida law. The case was remanded for further proceedings, but jurisdiction did not return to the trial court until the appellate mandate issued in February 2023. Continue reading ›

by
Posted in: Alimony
Published on:
Updated:

Published on: | by

Florida family courts must balance procedural safeguards with the need to assess credible testimony in sensitive domestic violence proceedings. One issue that sometimes arises is whether a minor child may testify in such hearings without a prior court order. A recent case from a Florida court clarifies that the rule limiting child participation is designed to protect the child, not to expand the rights of an adult respondent. If you are facing or responding to an injunction for protection in Florida, a Miami family law attorney can help ensure that all procedural rules and constitutional protections are upheld in your case.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the trial court entered two final injunctions for protection against domestic violence. One injunction was issued in favor of the defendant, and the other was entered on behalf of the parties’ minor child. Both injunctions were directed against the plaintiff, the child’s mother.

It is alleged that the final hearings on both injunctions were held together in a single proceeding. The plaintiff objected to the participation of the minor child, claiming that the child should not have been allowed to attend or testify without a court order, pursuant to Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.407(a). This rule prohibits children who are witnesses or otherwise involved in a family law case from attending proceedings without a prior court order based on good cause shown. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida divorce proceedings, courts are tasked with making equitable decisions on financial issues, including child support, life insurance to secure that support, and the division of marital liabilities. However, these determinations must be grounded in both statutory requirements and factual findings. A recent Florida decision highlights the importance of careful judicial analysis when imposing child support and related obligations. If you are navigating a divorce involving financial complexities, a Miami family law attorney can ensure your interests are protected throughout the proceedings.

History of the Case

It is reported that the parties were married for nine years and had two minor children before the husband initiated dissolution proceedings. The case proceeded to a three-day final hearing in April 2023, during which the husband represented himself. The trial court entered a final judgment addressing child support, life insurance to secure support, and the classification of a substantial employment-related financial obligation.

Allegedly, the trial court calculated child support based on a 70/30 timesharing split in favor of the wife. It is reported, however, that this allocation did not match the timesharing schedule outlined in the parties’ Parenting Plan, which granted the husband five overnights and the wife nine overnights every two weeks. This schedule more closely resembles a 65/35 division rather than the 70/30 ratio used in the court’s child support calculation. Continue reading ›

by
Posted in: Divorce
Published on:
Updated:

Published on: | by

In Florida family law cases, courts possess broad authority to ensure compliance with discovery and support obligations. However, this authority is bounded by due process and the requirement that coercive sanctions, such as daily fines, be imposed only after careful judicial consideration of the contemnor’s ability to pay. A recent opinion issued by a Florida court illustrates the legal safeguards required before a court may impose such coercive measures. If you are facing contempt proceedings or other enforcement actions in a divorce case, a knowledgeable Miami family law attorney can help protect your rights and guide you through the process.

Factual Background and Trial Court Proceedings

It is reported that the trial court entered a non-final order holding the petitioner in civil contempt for failure to comply with multiple prior agreed orders in an ongoing marital dissolution proceeding. The contempt finding stemmed from the petitioner’s alleged failure to file an updated financial affidavit, provide required financial discovery, and pay temporary support to the respondent.

Allegedly, the trial court had previously issued two orders in July 2024. It is reported that the petitioner did not fulfill his obligations under either order, prompting the respondent to pursue contempt sanctions. Continue reading ›

by
Posted in: Divorce
Published on:
Updated:

Published on: | by

In Florida, alimony determinations require careful application of a statutory two-step analysis designed to protect both parties’ financial rights while maintaining consistency with equitable principles. The process begins with a clear determination of each party’s actual financial need and the other party’s ability to pay. A recent decision from a Florida court demonstrates how improperly blending these analytical steps can lead to reversible error. If you are involved in a divorce proceeding where alimony is at issue, a Miami family law attorney can help ensure your rights are safeguarded through every phase of the litigation.

Factual Background and Trial Court Proceedings

It is reported that the parties’ marriage was dissolved by final judgment, during which the trial court evaluated alimony and other financial matters. The trial court found that the wife had a reasonable monthly need of $4,000 based on her testimony and documentary evidence. However, despite this explicit finding, the trial court immediately concluded that she had failed to demonstrate a need for alimony.

It is alleged that the court justified this conclusion by pointing to the wife’s physical ability to work and the substantial assets she received through equitable distribution. These findings appeared to contradict the initial recognition of a $4,000 monthly need. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida, family law courts must exercise precision and completeness when entering final judgments, especially in matters involving child support and attorney’s fees. Omissions related to stipulated financial obligations or procedural safeguards may warrant reversal on appeal. A recent decision from a Florida court highlights how failure to incorporate stipulated arrearages and to reserve jurisdiction over attorney’s fees can result in partial reversal and remand, even when the underlying dissolution of marriage is otherwise affirmed. If you intend to end your marriage, it is important to understand how to protect your rights, and you should talk to a Miami divorce attorney as soon as possible.

Factual Setting and Procedural Background

It is reported that the parties’ marriage dissolved after the defendant discovered that the plaintiff had relocated to her parents’ residence in New Jersey with the parties’ three minor children. The defendant filed a petition for dissolution, while the plaintiff filed a separate petition seeking permanent relocation of the children to New Jersey. These matters were later consolidated and addressed during a single hearing in the trial court.

Allegedly, the trial court granted the dissolution but denied the plaintiff’s relocation request. It is further reported that during the hearing, the parties, through their counsel, entered a stipulation acknowledging the defendant’s arrearage in child support. The amount of this arrearage appeared in one of the defendant’s own prior filings, identified as a Direct Payment Inquiry Letter submitted a month before the hearing. Despite this, the final judgment stated that the defendant was current in his support obligations under a New Jersey order, directly contradicting the earlier stipulation. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida family law, courts have the authority to suspend a parent’s timesharing rights on a temporary basis when emergency conditions threaten the welfare of the child. Although such suspensions may occur outside of the usual modification process, they are permissible when the situation presents an imminent risk of harm. A recent ruling from a Florida court reaffirms the judiciary’s discretion to act swiftly in such cases to protect children while preserving the parents’ right to seek future relief. If you are concerned about your parental rights, it is advisable to confer with a Miami child custody attorney.

Factual Setting and Procedural Background

It is reported that the trial court issued a non-final order temporarily suspending the plaintiff’s timesharing rights with the minor child. The order followed a claim of emergency filed by the defendant, who alleged circumstances that placed the child’s welfare in jeopardy. Although the underlying facts are not set forth in detail within the appellate opinion, it is alleged that the trial court acted to prevent potential harm, consistent with its statutory obligation to prioritize the best interests of the child.

It is further reported that the plaintiff appealed the trial court’s decision, asserting that the suspension of timesharing was unwarranted and that the trial court had abused its discretion. However, the defendant maintained that the court’s actions were justified by the presence of a genuine emergency involving child endangerment or the threat of removal from the court’s jurisdiction. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida, the modification of a timesharing agreement requires proof of a substantial and unanticipated change in circumstances that affects the best interests of the child. Once such findings are made by the trial court after an evidentiary hearing, appellate review is significantly constrained, especially when the record on appeal is incomplete. A recent case decided by a Florida court highlights the critical importance of an adequate appellate record when challenging a timesharing judgment. If you have questions about how you can protect your parental rights, it is wise to confer with a Miami child custody lawyer at your earliest convenience.

History of the Case

It is reported that the trial court modified the parties’ existing timesharing agreement following a bench trial, granting the defendant a revised custodial arrangement based on her allegations of a substantial change in circumstances. It is alleged that the defendant presented evidence of the plaintiff’s instability, a history of violent outbursts, and a failure to meet the educational needs of the minor child. Specific examples reportedly included repeated failures to assist with homework and a refusal to comply with the child’s school-mandated summer school program.

It is further reported that the plaintiff appealed the trial court’s judgment, asserting several procedural and factual objections. He claimed that he was denied a meaningful opportunity to be heard, that the legal standard for a substantial change was not met, and that the final order relied on inaccurate factual representations, which he alleged amounted to perjury by the defendant. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida family law, trial courts are granted broad discretion in making decisions related to parenting responsibilities, the division of marital assets, and the allocation of attorney’s fees. Appellate courts will not disturb such decisions unless they are unsupported by evidence or involve legal error. A recent ruling by a Florida court illustrates how this deferential standard of review functions in the context of contested divorce proceedings involving parental authority and disputed property classification. If you intend to seek a divorce, it is smart to talk to a Miami divorce attorney about what steps you can take to protect your interests.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff appealed a final judgment dissolving his marriage to the defendant, raising three central issues on appeal. First, he challenged the trial court’s decision to award the defendant ultimate decision-making authority over their minor child’s education and healthcare. Second, he contested the equitable distribution, claiming that the trial court improperly classified and awarded the defendant half of what he alleged to be nonmarital property. Third, he disputed the trial court’s order requiring him to pay the defendant’s attorney’s fees and costs in full.

It is alleged that during trial, the defendant presented testimony in support of her request for ultimate parental responsibility concerning the child’s medical and educational matters. The plaintiff reportedly did not present rebuttal evidence to challenge her request or demonstrate that joint decision-making would serve the child’s best interests. The trial court found the defendant’s evidence competent and substantial, warranting the award of decision-making authority. Continue reading ›