Fort Lauderdale Divorce Lawyer Blog
Property division in divorce cases is often a battleground, especially when significant assets like the marital home have appreciated in value. The timing of asset valuation can make a substantial difference in how property is distributed, and courts must carefully assess the appropriate date to ensure fairness. For example, in a recent Florida decision, the court ruled that a trial court erred by valuing the marital home at the time of trial rather than at the date of the parties’ separation. If you are going through a divorce involving property division, you should speak to an experienced Florida family law attorney about how you can protect your financial interests.
Factual Setting and Procedural Background
It is reported that the parties were married in 2000 and later separated in 2015. The trial court found that both parties had contributed to the marital home’s purchase and initial improvements, but after the separation, the husband remained in the home while the wife ceased contributing to mortgage payments, repairs, or maintenance costs. Despite this, the trial court determined that the home’s value should be assessed as of the trial date rather than the separation date, citing passive appreciation.
The husband moved for rehearing, arguing that the valuation should be based on the separation date since he had maintained the property for years alone without financial support from the wife. He further contended that the trial court improperly considered the wife’s earlier financial contributions, as they occurred before the separation. The trial court denied the motion, leading the husband to appeal.
Home Valuation in Florida Divorces
Under Florida Statutes section 61.075, trial courts have discretion in selecting a valuation date for marital assets, but they must justify their choice with factual findings supported by competent, substantial evidence. Courts must also determine whether the post-separation appreciation of a marital asset was due to the efforts of one spouse alone.
On review, the court referenced Perlmutter v. Perlmutter, which states that valuation dates should be determined based on the unique facts of each case. The court also relied on Bellegarde v. Bellegarde, which held that when only one spouse maintains a marital home after separation, the valuation date should be set at the time of separation, not at trial.
Applying these legal principles, the appellate court found that the husband had been solely responsible for all mortgage payments, taxes, repairs, and maintenance costs following the separation. In contrast, the wife had not contributed financially to the home in any way post-separation. Citing Norwood v. Anapol-Norwood, the court reiterated that a non-contributing spouse is not entitled to benefit from passive appreciation when the continued ownership of the home is due solely to the efforts of the other spouse.
As such, the court reversed the trial court’s decision, ruling that the marital home should be valued as of the date of separation rather than the trial date. The case was remanded for the trial court to apply the correct valuation standard.
Meet with an Assertive Florida Divorce Attorney
Property division can be one of the most complex and high-stakes aspects of a divorce, particularly when significant assets like real estate are involved. Ensuring that assets are valued correctly is essential to achieving a fair financial outcome. If you are facing a divorce that involves property distribution, the assertive Miami family law attorneys at the Law Offices of Sandy T. Fox, P.A. can guide you through the process and fight for your financial rights. To schedule a confidential consultation, contact us at 800-596-0579 or use our online form.