March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
Alimony payments may be reduced or terminated when a former spouse enters into a supportive relationship. The payor bears the burden to prove that a supportive relationship exists. Some of the factors that Florida courts assess in determining whether a supportive relationship exists are as follows:
First, whether the recipient and the cohabiting party have held themselves out as a married couple.
Second, the amount of time that the parties have resided together in a permanent residence.
Continue reading
Posted in:
Alimony
Tagged:
Alimony
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
The Florida alimony reform bill passed the Florida legislature and was signed by Governor Ron DeSantis on June 30, 2023. This bill will have a significant impact on how alimony will be awarded in Florida. It applies to all initial petitions for dissolution of marriage that are filed or pending on July 1, 2023, and to certain supplemental petitions for modification of alimony. The following is a brief synopsis of how alimony will be awarded in Florida under this new legislation.
First, the bill eliminates permanent alimony. In its place, will be four types of alimony. They will be temporary, bridge-the-gap, rehabilitative and durational alimony. Courts may order alimony to be paid in a lump sum or as periodic payments.
Second, courts will be permitted to consider the adultery of either spouse and its resulting economic impact in determining the amount of alimony to award.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
A Petition for alimony or termination of alimony may be filed by an alimony obligor based upon his or her actual retirement, under the new alimony reform bill that was recently introduced in the Florida House of Representatives. In order for there to be a termination or modification of alimony, the following circumstances must occur: (i) the paying spouse must have reached the age for eligibility to receive full Social Security retirement benefits and have retired, or (ii) the paying spouse must have reached the customary age for retirement for his or her occupation and must have retired from that occupation.
If an alimony obligor voluntarily retires before reaching either of the ages described above, the court shall determine whether the obligor’s retirement is reasonable based upon a consideration of the obligor’s: (i) age, (ii) health, (iii) motivation for retirement, and (iv) the financial impact on the alimony recipient. Upon a finding that the payor’s retirement is reasonable, there is a rebuttable presumption that an existing alimony obligation shall be modified or terminated.
The court shall modify or terminate the alimony obligation, or make a determination regarding whether the rebuttable presumption has been overcome, based upon the following factors that currently apply to the parties: (i) the age of the parties, (ii) the health of the parties, (iii) the assets and liabilities of the parties, (iv) the earned or imputed income of the parties, (v) the ability of the parties to maintain part-time or full-time employment, and (iv) any other factors that the court considers to be relevant.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
The modification of alimony as a result of cohabitation and the entry into a supportive relationship was recently addressed as part of the Florida Alimony Reform Legislation that was introduced in the 2015 session of the Florida House of Representatives.
Under the proposed legislation, the court may reduce alimony or terminate alimony when: (i) a supportive relationship exists or has existed after the entry of the final judgment of divorce and (ii) a supportive relationship exists or has existed in the year preceding the filing of the request for the modification of alimony or termination of support.
The trial court is directed to utilize the following factors to determine whether cohabitation or the entry into a supportive relationship warrants a modification or termination of alimony: (i) whether the parties have held themselves out as a married couple by using the same last name, using a common mailing address, referring to each other by terms such as my husband or my wife, or otherwise conducting themselves in a manner that evidences a permanent supportive relationship; (ii) the duration of time that the parties have resided together; (iii) whether the parties have pooled their income or assets; (iv) whether one party has supported the other; (v) whether one party has performed valuable services for the other; (vi) whether one party has performed valuable services for the other parties’ employer or company; (vii) whether the parties have worked together to create or enhance anything of value; (viii) whether the parties both contributed to the purchase of property; (ix) whether the parties have an express agreement regarding property sharing and support; (x) whether the parties have an implied agreement regarding property sharing and support; (xi) whether the parties have provided support to each other’s children; (xii) whether the paying spouse failed to complied with his/her court ordered obligations and whether this failure was a significant factor in the establishment of the supportive relationship; and (xiii) the extent to which the recipient spouse provides caretaking to a close relative with whom the recipient spouse resides or receives caretaking from a close relative with whom the recipient resides.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
Florida Alimony Reform legislation recently failed in the Florida legislature with the early departure of the Florida House of Representatives on April 28, 2015. A special session for the Florida legislature is likely to take place on June 1, 2015, however, Alimony Reform legislation may or may not be addressed at that time.
The main point of disagreement between the Florida House of Representatives and the Florida Senate was language that was contained in the Florida Senate version of the alimony reform bill which provided that equal time-sharing with minor children by both parents is presumed to be in the best interest of the children. The members of the Florida House of Representatives felt that each case is unique, and that the courts are in the best position to reach time-sharing determinations without preconceived guidelines. Whether consensus is able to be reached on these positions is yet to be determined.
The Alimony Reform bill created guidelines, comprised of presumptive alimony amounts and presumptive alimony durations.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
The pending Florida Alimony Reform Bill was recently revised in the Florida Senate. The original version of the bill was replaced by a committee substitute. The revised bill creates new alimony guidelines. In calculating alimony, the Court is to first calculate the amount of each party’s monthly gross income. Included in a party’s monthly gross income are the actual income that a party earns and the potential income that a party could earn. Additionally, included in a party’s monthly gross income are the actual income that a party earns from nonmarital property and marital assets distributed to that party, as well as potential income that a party could earn from nonmarital property and marital assets distributed to that party. In calculating the difference between the parties’ monthly gross income, the income of the party seeking alimony is be subtracted from the income of the other party. If this is a negative number, the presumptive alimony amount is $0.
The legislation in the Florida Senate creates a presumptive range for the duration that alimony is to be paid and a presumptive range for the amount of alimony that is to be paid. The low end of the presumptive range for the amount of alimony that is to be paid is to be paid is calculated by using the following formula: (0.015 x the years of marriage) x the difference between the monthly gross incomes of the parties. The high end of the presumptive range for the amount of alimony that is to be paid is calculated by using the following formula: (0.020 x the years of marriage) x the difference between the monthly gross incomes of the parties. In calculating the presumptive alimony amount range, twenty (20) years of marriage is used to calculate the low end and the high end for marriages of twenty (20) years or more. If a court establishes the duration of the alimony award at fifty (50%) percent or less of the length of the marriage, the court shall use the actual years of the marriage, up to a maximum of twenty-five (25) years, to calculate the high end of the presumptive alimony amount range. The duration of a marriage is determined from the date of the marriage until the date of the filing of the divorce.
The low end of the presumptive range for the duration that alimony is to be paid is calculated by using the following formula: 0.25 x the years of marriage. The high end of the presumptive range for the duration that alimony is to be paid is calculated by using the following formula: 0.7 5 x the years of marriage.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
In a recent paternity case captioned Perez v. Fay, the Florida Court of Appeal stated that a parent has a constitutionally protected right to a meaningful relationship with his child. Time-sharing privileges should not be denied to either parent as long as the parent conducts himself, while in the presence of the child, in a manner which will not adversely affect the child. Because of the constitutional right to a meaningful parent-child relationship, there must be substantial evidence in the record that demonstrates that any restrictions on time-sharing are in the best interests of the child before those restrictions will be upheld. In Perez v. Fay, there was no evidence that the parent had conducted themselves during their supervised time-sharing in any manner that would adversely affect the parties’ child. However, the trial court reduced the parent’s time-sharing with the child from two to three hours per week to only four hours per month. This drastic reduction in the parent’s time-sharing was reversed by the Court of Appeal.
Additionally, in Perez v. Fay, the Court of Appeal stated that the trial court made a mistake when it delegated to a time-sharing supervisor the authority to schedule the parent’s time-sharing at the time-sharing supervisor’s sole discretion. The Court found that it is the trial court’s duty to ensure that an appropriate relationship is maintained between a parent and his child, and that responsibility cannot be abdicated to an expert. The trial court cannot delegate its authority to another person to rule on the visitation details. The trial court must make sure that an appropriate relationship is maintained between a parent and a child and it cannot delegate its responsibility to the person supervising time-sharing. Finally, in paternity case, the Court found that the expense of a time-sharing coordinator must be allocated in the same manner as child support obligations are allocated.
To speak with a father’s rights attorney in Palm Beach Gardens, contact Matthew Jay Lane & Associates, P.A. at (561) 363-3400.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
Unmarried father’s rights were discussed in a recently decided case captioned State of Florida Department of Revenue v. Augustin. The Florida statutes provide for a mechanism under which men may disestablish paternity and terminate their child support obligation. In order to do this a man must prove seven things. First, that since the initial establishment of the father’s paternity, he became aware of newly discovered evidence that proves that he is not the father of the child. Second, a paternity test was properly conducted which demonstrates that he is not the father of the child. Third, that the petitioner is current on his child support payments or that there is a justification for his failure to do so. Fourth, that the petitioner has not adopted the child. Fifth, that the child was not the produce of in vitro fertilization. Sixth, that the petitioner did not take any action to deprive the actual father from asserting his righ ts. Seventh, that the child was less than eighteen years of age when the petition was filed.
State of Florida Department of Revenue v. Augustin, involved a paternity appeal by the Florida Department of Revenue of a decision by the lower court. In 2013, the trial court ruled that the alleged father was the father of a child. The alleged father filed a petition to disestablish paternity in 2015. The father’s petition alleged that a 2009 DNA test constituted newly discovered evidence that proved that he was not the father of this child. The father alleged that there was a 99.1% probability that he was not the father of the child. The trial court agreed with the alleged father and disestablished his paternity. The trial court ruled that the father was aware that the child was not his since 2009, and that the mother and the actual father were currently living with the child.
The trial court granted the alleged father’s petition to disestablish paternity. The Department of Revenue appealed this decision based upon the fact that the trial court did not make the required findings under the Florida Statutes. Because the trial court did not make the seven required findings under Florida Statutes, the Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s decision.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
In an alimony case captioned Speigner v. Speigner, the parties were married for almost twenty (20) years. Both parties worked during the course of the marriage. The Husband had the larger income. The Wife worked, raised the parties’ children and ran the household.
After hearing the evidence, the trial court found that the Wife had a need for support and the former husband had the ability to pay. The court stated that the Wife had significant business acumen and found that both the Husband and the Wife had the capacity to earn additional income. The trial court awarded the Wife eight years of durational alimony.
The Florida Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s ruling. In reversing the lower court’s ruling the appellate court pointed out that in Florida, a long-term marriage is a marriage that exceeds seventeen years. There is a rebuttable presumption that permanent alimony will be awarded following a long-term marriage. This presumption can only be rebutted if there is proof that after termination of the alimony payments the recipient spouse has the capacity to support him or herself at the marital standard of living. Durational alimony is only appropriate if the court finds that the recipient spouse does not have an ongoing need for support on a permanent basis. In order to justify an award of durational alimony following a long-term marriage, a court must find that the recipient spouse is capable of attaining a level of self-support that is commensurate with the marital standard of living at the time that the durational alimony expires.
Continue reading
Posted in:
Alimony
Tagged:
Alimony
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
Valuation dates are important in high asset/high net-worth divorces cases in Florida. In a case captioned Murphy v. Murphy, the Florida Court of Appeal recently addressed this issue. In Murphy v. Murphy the Husband appealed the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage. The Wife cross-appealed the trial court’s Final Judgment.
The Husband and Wife were married in 2001. In 2003, the Husband opened an investment and retirement savings plan. The Husband contributed to the investment and retirement savings plan during the course of the parties’ marriage. After the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage was filed, the Husband continued to contribute to the investment and retirement savings plan. The trial court ruled that the investment and retirement savings plan was a marital asset. Accordingly, the lower court divided the plan equally between the parties. The Husband argued to the Florida Court of Appeal that his contributions to the investment and retirement savings plan after the filing of the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage was filed made this plan a nonmarital assets.
The Florida Court of Appeal agreed with Husband’s position and reversed the trial court. The Florida Court of Appeal stated that in high asset/high net-worth divorce cases, when the increase in the value of an asset was the result of one spouse’s individual efforts after the filing of the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage, that asset should be valued as of the date of the filing of the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage. For example, a business might be worth $90,000,000.00 at the time of the filing of the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage. Subsequent to the filing of the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage, the business might be worth $180,000,000.00. Under the Florida Court of Appeal analysis in Murphy v. Murphy, the asset will be valued for purposes of equitable distribution on the date of the filing of the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage.
Continue reading
