Articles Posted in Equitable Distribution

In Florida, people who wish to end their marriage must abide by specific procedural rules when filing their petition for dissolution. Additionally, spouses responding to such petitions are bound by procedural rules as well. If a responding party declines to abide by such rules and fails to file an answer, the court may enter a default judgment against them. Further refusal to partake in the litigation process could ultimately result in a waiver of the right to pursue an appeal. This was illustrated in a recent Florida divorce action in which the court found the husband’s failure to comply with procedural obligations or respond to discovery constituted a waiver of his right to present evidence on disputed financial issues. If you want to learn more about how you can protect your interests while ending your marraige, you should talk to  a Miami divorce lawyer.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the husband and wife were married, and the wife subsequently filed a petition for dissolution. The husband failed to respond to the petition, and the wife moved for a default judgment. The trial court ultimately granted the wife’s motion and issued a final judgment of dissolution, setting forth, among other things, the party’s financial rights and obligations.

It is reported that in issuing the judgment, the trial court found that the husband had waived his right to present evidence on certain disputed financial issues because he failed to respond to discovery requests, did not file a financial affidavit, and did not move to set aside the default judgment against him. The husband later appealed the trial court’s decision regarding financial matters. Continue reading ›

It is well established under Florida law that, absent a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement, marital assets are subject to equitable distribution in divorce actions, while separate assets are not. It is not uncommon for a court to mischaracterize an asset, however, and order a separate asset to be divided among the parties. Recently, a Florida court issued an opinion clarifying the classification of assets in divorce actions, in a matter in which it ultimately reversed the trial court’s determination. If you have questions about your rights with regard to equitable distribution, it is smart to speak to a Miami divorce lawyer.

Factual History and Procedural Background

It is reported that the husband and wife were married but filed an action to dissolve their union. The trial court ultimately issued a final judgment, distributing the parties’ community assets. The husband then sought review of the final judgment issued by the trial court. One of the key issues in the appeal concerned the inclusion of one of the husband’s bank CD accounts in the equitable distribution schedule. The husband argued that this account was a nonmarital asset, as he had acquired it ten years before the marriage and maintained sole control over it throughout the marriage. The trial court, however, had classified the account as a marital asset subject to equitable distribution.

Classification of Assets in Divorce Actions

On appeal, the court found that the sole issue raised by the husband that warranted review was the trial court’s classification of the CD account. The court explained that under Florida law, assets acquired by one party before marriage are generally considered nonmarital assets unless there is evidence of enhancement, commingling, or intent to gift the asset to the other spouse during the marriage. Continue reading ›

Pursuant to Florida law, with few exceptions, any assets obtained during a marriage are considered marital property, while property obtained prior to the marriage remains separate. Applying this general rule can become complicated in divorce actions in which the parties mingle separate and marital assets. As discussed in a recent Florida divorce action, when marital assets are used to pay for a non-marital asset, any appreciation in the value of the property is a marital asset as well. If you have questions with regard to your rights in a dissolution proceeding, it would benefit you to consult a Miami divorce lawyer at your earliest convenience.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the parties were married in 2005. In 2015, the wife filed for dissolution of the marriage. The husband responded with a counterpetition. The trial court issued a final judgment of dissolution, which was subsequently appealed. In the initial appeal, the court determined that the husband’s Miami property was a non-marital asset and remanded the case to determine if there was any appreciation in its value during the marriage.

Reportedly, upon remand, the trial court found that the Miami property had depreciated during the marriage and concluded that the wife was not entitled to any share of the appreciation. The wife filed a motion for rehearing, which the court denied pursuant to an order agreed upon by the parties. The wife then appealed. Continue reading ›

In many divorce cases, one of the biggest issues is how marital property, including retirement income, should be divided. As such, many couples will develop marital settlement agreements defining their rights and obligations with regard to retirement. If the terms of such agreements are unclear, however, it could create challenges down the road, as demonstrated in a recent Florida divorce action in which the court discussed the construction of marital settlement agreements. If you need help protecting your interests in a divorce proceeding, it is advisable to confer with a Miami divorce attorney.

Factual Background and Procedural Setting

It is reported that in 2001, the husband petitioned for dissolution of marriage from the wife. They subsequently entered into a marital settlement agreement (MSA) to resolve their marital issues, which was incorporated into the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage in 2002. Twenty years later, the wife moved to reopen the dissolution and enforce a provision of the MSA regarding the distribution of retirement benefits.

Allegedly, the disputed provision, labeled “Personal Property,” outlined the distribution of the husband’s retirement benefits from his 457 plan with Pinellas County, Florida, and the Florida Retirement System (FRS) pension. The wife argued that she was entitled to half of all FRS benefits received by the husband, including those accrued after the dissolution, based on the language of the MSA. The husband, however, contended that the provision only entitled the wife to half of the marital portion of the FRS benefits, which included benefits accrued during the marriage. The trial court determined that the language of the MSA was clear but interpreted it to mean that the wife was entitled to half of what the husband had at the time of the agreement. The wife appealed. Continue reading ›

In Florida divorce actions, what constitutes marital property, and how such assets should be divided is often one of the most contested issues. Generally, separate property remains separate unless the spouse that owns the property comingles assets or otherwise takes action to commute it into marital property. As discussed in a recent Florida divorce action, absent such conduct, separate property will usually remain separate. If you need assistance protecting your rights in a divorce action, it is wise to meet with a Miami divorce attorney promptly.

History of the Case

It is reported that the husband and wife divorced via a final judgment of dissolution entered by the trial court. The husband then appealed the final judgment. At the heart of the dispute are the classification and equitable distribution of assets, specifically related to the husband’s dental practice and the company that owns the building from which the dental practice operated. The trial court initially classified both entities as nonmarital assets, meaning their overall value wouldn’t be divided upon marriage dissolution. The wife contested this classification, however, particularly regarding the enhanced value of asserting that its appreciation during the marriage should be considered a marital asset. The court agreed with the wife, finding that the appreciation of the value of the company was marital property.

Florida is an equitable distribution state, which means that, for the most part, any assets acquired during a marriage are considered the property of both parties. Further, such property is subject to division by the courts in the event a couple decides to divorce. The courts do not have to divide marital property equally, however, but can disburse them in a manner they deem fair. Recently, a Florida court examined the process of fashioning an equitable distribution in a case in which the husband appealed the trial court’s ruling. If you are interested in learning more about how the decision to divorce could impact you financially, it is advisable to speak with a Miami divorce lawyer promptly.

Procedural Setting of the Case

It is reported that the husband and wife married in 2002 and separated in August 2012. They lived apart for six years until the husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage. The trial court conducted a trial and issued a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, which included an attached equitable distribution spreadsheet. Following the trial court’s decision, the husband filed a motion for rehearing, which was denied. The husband then appealed.

Equitable Distribution in Florida Divorce Actions

On appeal, the husband raises several issues with regard to the court’s equitable distribution, including the assertion that the trial court erred in granting the wife credit for tax liability owed by the husband. Continue reading ›

Florida is an equitable distribution state, which means that any property deemed a marital asset will be divided equitably among the parties in a divorce action, while any separate property will remain separate. As such, it is critical that the courts properly characterize all property the parties own to ensure a fair distribution. If a court errs when determining the nature of an asset, the parties may be able to appeal the final judgment of dissolution, as illustrated in a recent Florida ruling. If you intend to seek a divorce, it is wise to talk to a Miami divorce lawyer about your options.

History of the Case

It is reported that the husband filed a divorce petition in 2015. During the divorce trial, the main points of contention were the classification of financial accounts owned by the wife and real properties owned by the husband. The trial court issued a final judgment of dissolution of marriage in 2016, ruling that certain financial accounts were partially marital assets and that the classification of the properties was marital. The court did not provide a rationale for its decision.

Allegedly, in March 2022, a hearing was held to determine the non-marital portion of the wife’s financial accounts. The wife stipulated that four accounts were entirely marital, but the parties disagreed on the classification of the fifth account, which was an IRA. After the hearing, the trial court determined that the entire IRA was the wife’s nonmarital asset based on her testimony, the testimony of a certified public accountant, and submitted financial records. The husband appealed. Continue reading ›

In Florida divorce actions, the parties will often engage in discovery to gain a better understanding of their separate and marital assets. Such discovery generally must be completed before the parties enter into a marital settlement agreement. There are exceptions to the general rule, however, such as when one party alleges the other fraudulently withheld information regarding their property interests. In a recent Florida ruling, the court discussed when allegations of fraud constitute grounds for permitting post-marital settlement agreement discovery. If you intend to seek a divorce, it is smart to speak to a Miami divorce lawyer about what actions you can take to protect your interests.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the parties, who were in the process of divorcing, entered into a marital settlement agreement (MSA) that addressed alimony, child support, property distribution, and bank accounts, stating that each party would retain 100% interest in the accounts titled under their respective names. The agreement also acknowledged that the parties had legal representation and the opportunity for discovery and waived the right to engage in additional discovery. The parties represented that they had sufficient knowledge of each other’s financial circumstances before executing the MSA.

Allegedly, the court incorporated the MSA into the final dissolution judgment. The wife subsequently moved to set aside the MSA, alleging that the former husband had fraudulently withheld information by opening two undisclosed bank accounts shortly before the MSA was finalized and filed notices of intent to subpoena the two non-party banks involved. The husband objected to the subpoenas, which were overruled. He then appealed. Continue reading ›

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 ›