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

The law regarding alimony contains several nuances. One of these is a statutory rule that says that the amount of evidence a spouse must offer in order to obtain permanent alimony differs based upon how long the couple was married. This rule recently led to the reversal of a Tampa court’s decision to deny a wife permanent alimony, since the 2d District Court of Appeal concluded that the lower court denied the wife’s permanent alimony request based upon the wrong standard of proof.

In Irene and Randy Banks’ case, theirs was a long-term marriage, having wedded before NASA launched the first space shuttle or the University of Miami won its first national football championship. The couple separated in 2011, with the wife filing for divorce shortly before the year’s end. At the time of their divorce, the husband made $90,000 a year and received a military pension that paid him almost $2,300 per month. The wife was unemployed but, in the trial court’s opinion, had a ability to earn $25,000 per year.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Two of the most important decisions many parents will make regarding their children center around the children’s education and their religious affiliation. Two recent cases, one from the 3d District Court of Appeal and one from the 2d DCA, demonstrate the importance of documenting the entirety of your and your spouse’s agreement regarding your children’s education, and of understanding exactly how tuition payments may affect child support calculations.

If both parents agree that their child (or children) should attend private school for some or all of their education, the marital settlement agreement between the parents should be very clear about what the couple agreed to, since when an agreement is silent on an issue, the courts will construe that to mean that the couple did not resolve that issue.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

The recent economic recession created financial hardships for many, including numerous people who lost their jobs. When you lose your job, you have many things you must deal with. If you owe child support and you’re unemployed, there are certain situations in which your child’s support may be calculated based upon an income you don’t have. In a recent case from Martin County, the 4th District Court of Appeal highlighted the rules for child support obligations in these situations.

The case involved the support of the one child of Miguel Perales and Jennifer Heard, born in 2009. Each parent asked the trial court for a determination of child support in 2010. At that time, the mother was unemployed, having lost her job as a deputy sheriff after she was caught improperly recording conversations with Perales and accessing the driver’s license and vehicle information database for non-work related reasons, namely researching Perales’ girlfriend and attorneys.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

As a certain popular television show illustrates, the “modern family” comes in many diverse versions. With more families who are not like the Cleavers of Leave it to Beaver fame, there are more situations when a person prominently involved in the care of a child may not have a biological relationship to that child. A recent case from North Florida brought this scenario front and center, as the 1st District Court of Appeal issued a ruling highlighting the legal rule that says, when a natural parent and a non-parent are locked in a custody dispute, the courts must look beyond just the “best interests of the child.”

The recent case involved a couple from the greater Jacksonville area, Lisa Corona and David Harris. When the couple split up in November 2012, both of the two children who lived with them went with Harris. The couple eventually went to court to address timesharing and child support issues. The trial court gave Harris the majority of timesharing, with Corona receiving the children a fraction of the time.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Family law cases can arise from a variety of origins. Unfortunately, one of these bases for filing, especially in contempt matters, is vindictiveness against one’s “ex.” A 2d District Court of Appeal decision recently upheld a Sarasota trial court’s refusal to hold a mother in contempt. Even though the father proved the mother’s violation of the couple’s timesharing plan, the trial court was free not to hold the mother in contempt, which it did in order to discourage more “vindictive and vexatious” actions between these parents. This case is very instructive regarding what options judges have in contempt cases and in dealing with spouses or parents who use the court system to “get back” at their former partners.

The case centered on the family of Steven Brooks and Kimberlee Brooks, who divorced in 2011 after 17 years of marriage. The couple had three children who resided predominantly with their mother. The father received every other weekend. The couple’s timesharing plan required each parent to provide the other with 30 days advance notice and a detailed itinerary in any cases of trips that spanned outside Florida.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Generally, in order to obtain a modification in your timesharing agreement, both parents must be placed on notice that the court’s ruling may bring about a change in the current plan. In some situations, a court may alter the timesharing arrangement without notice if an emergency exists. The 3d District Court of Appeal recently overturned a Miami-Dade County trial court order because the mother did not have proper notice, and the conditions for an emergency change did not exist.

After several years of marriage, Tal Bronstein and Elizabeth Bronstein divorced in 2012. The couple had one minor child. By the time the divorce was finalized, the husband lived in Colorado.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Divorce can bring out many complicated issues, particularly when it comes to money. On the one hand, a nefarious spouse may try to deplete assets before the case is finalized. On the other hand, spouses continue to have bills and financial obligations that often require dissipating marital assets to pay. Regardless of what a spouse’s true motives may have been, the dissipation of marital assets should only be included in an equitable distribution of assets if the trial court specifically finds that the dissipating spouse engaged in intentional misconduct, the 4th District Court of Appeal recently ruled.

Bonnie Jean Platt filed for a divorce from her husband, Minor J. Platt, Jr. While the case was pending, the wife allegedly took several guns and pieces of jewelry and sold them. After the sales, the court heard evidence regarding the value of the sold items, and it concluded that the guns were worth $6,500 and the jewelry had a value of $6,200. Having made this determination, the trial court then included that $12,700 as an amount that the wife received in calculating the couple’s equitable distribution.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

When a parent voluntarily chooses not to work, or to take a job that is below his or her true professional ability, the law calls for the courts to ascertain what that parent’s true earning capacity is in order to assess the proper amount of child support owed to that parent’s children. As a recent 1st District Court of Appeal case points out, the court cannot base its ruling on just any jobs, but only those jobs for which the parent is qualified and that are located in Florida.

The case involved a child support dispute between former spouses Glenn Broga and Linda Broga, who divorced in the summer of 2012 after 21 years of marriage. The couple had three children together. At trial, the wife brought a forensic economist, who testified about the husband’s earning capacity. Despite the husband’s being unemployed, the trial court imputed an annual income of $80,000, based at least in part on the economics expert’s testimony.
Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In the most recent case involving same-sex couples who married in other states and seek to divorce in Florida, the 2d District Court of Appeal concluded that a southwest Florida trial court was wrong to dismiss a woman’s dissolution of marriage petition. The court ruling decided that, under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Florida courts should entertain same-sex spouses’ divorce petitions just as they would hear a petition for dissolution filed by a heterosexual spouse who married in another state.

This case involved Danielle and Krista Brandon-Thomas, who married in Massachusetts in the fall of 2012. Shortly thereafter, the couple moved to Florida, but the marriage did not last. Just a year after their wedding, Danielle filed for divorce in Lee County. Krista, in a position supposed by the Florida Attorney General, asked the trial court to throw out the case, arguing that Florida law did not recognize same-sex marriages and Florida courts had no power to dissolve that which, under the terms of the Florida Statutes, never existed.
Continue reading ›

by
Posted in: Divorce
Published on:
Updated:

Published on: | by

One of the more popular celebrity news stories of this spring has involved the impending divorce of renowned chef and Food Network TV star Bobby Flay, who filed to end his decade-long marriage to actress Stephanie March. According to a celebrity news website, TMZ, the couple signed a prenuptial agreement before their 2005 wedding, but the wife plans to challenge the validity of the agreement. While the dispute regarding the Flay-March prenuptial agreement will, unless settled between the spouses, be decided by a New York court, the story does raise a relevant issue for Floridians with prenuptial agreements who are contemplating divorce: namely, what are circumstances under which Florida law will prevent a prenuptial agreement’s enforcement?

Florida Statutes Section 61.07(7) sets out a list of several reasons why a prenuptial agreement can be set aside. If one of the spouses did not sign the document voluntarily, it is not enforceable. If a spouse received cash or other valuable assets in exchange for signing the prenup, that may allow for setting the agreement aside.
Continue reading ›