March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
In a recent child support case involving unmarried parents, the mother attempted to impute income to the father. The father lost his job as a commodity broker as a result of his misappropriation of funds. The mother introduced a report from a vocational expert in an attempt to impute income to the father.
In a case captioned, Damask v. Ryabchenko, the Florida Court of Appeal began by pointing out that Florida’s child support guideline presumptively set forth the amount that trial courts should award as child support in initial proceedings and modification proceedings. The child support guidelines can be also used to provide a basis to prove that there has been a substantial change of circumstances that warrants a modification of child support.
Income should be imputed to unemployed or underemployed parents when their unemployment or underemployment is voluntary. If a parent is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed, the parent’s probable earnings are determined based upon his or her recent earnings, qualifications, and prevailing earnings in the community. The party seeking to impute income has the burden of proving that the other party’s unemployment or underemployment was voluntary, and must provide evidence to the court that income is available to the payor from employment for which he or she is qualified by education, experience, and geographic location. In determining geographic location, consideration should be given to the parties’ custody and visitation schedule and the parties historical utilization of time-sharing with their children.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
Where parties jointly decide that one parent should stay at home to raise and care for their children, Florida courts give great deference to this decision and ordinarily do not impute income to the stay-at-home parent in awarding alimony.
In a case captioned Wilkins v. Wilkins, the Former Wife appealed the lower court’s order granting temporary relief to the Former Husband. During the course of their relationship, the Former Husband and the Former Wife agreed that the Former Wife would live with her family and take care of the parties’ minor child and a child from the Former Wife’s previous relationship while she was completing her nursing degree.
The trial court found that the Former Wife took only one nursing course during the time that she lived with her family, and imputed income to the Former Wife for purposes of calculating child support. The trial court ordered the Former Wife to pay child support to her Former Husband, who was on active military duty.
Continue reading
Posted in:
Divorce
Tagged:
Divorce
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
An alimony case involving imputation of income was recently decided by the Florida Court of Appeal in a case captioned Waldera v. Waldera. In this case, the husband and wife were married in 1999. At the time of their marriage, the wife held a bachelor’s degree in accounting. She worked as a fulltime bookkeeper at the husband’s law firm. When their only child was born, the husband and wife agreed that the wife would work part-time and would home school their child. The wife continued to work part time at her husband’s law firm until 2011. After 2011, the wife worked part-time as a bookkeeper for some private clients. In 2015, divorce proceedings were instituted.
In this appeal, the wife argued that the trial judge erred in its imputation of income to her. The Florida Court of Appeal agreed. In reaching its determination, the Court of Appeal pointed out that in order to impute income to a party, the trial judge must find that the party has the ability to earn more income than he or she is currently earning, and that he or she has deliberately refused to be employed at this higher earning capacity. A court must make a finding that a party failed to make his or her best efforts to earn more money. Income cannot be imputed based upon records that are over five years old. Additionally, courts may not impute income to a party that is greater than that party has historically earned, absent special circumstances. The party seeking to impute income must establish the range of salaries that are currently being paid for available employment opportunities in the area, based upon the employee’s qualifications, including their work history, education, and physical restrictions. Finally, a trial court is required to award significant deference to the parties’ decision that a spouse is to stay home in order to care for their children. This is especially so when the parties have established a course of conduct over a period of time.
To speak with a Wellington, Florida divorce attorney to discuss alimony, contact the Lane Law Firm, P.A. at (561) 363-3400.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
A Modification of Child Custody and Visitation case was recently decided by the Florida Court of Appeal in a case captioned Romeo v. Romeo. In this case, the former husband and former wife were divorced in 2007. The Final Judgment dissolving their marriage contained an agreed upon time-sharing schedule for their minor children. The former husband filed a Supplemental Petition for Modification of Time-sharing. After a hearing, the trial court granted the former husband’s request for a modification of the parties’ time-sharing schedule for their minor children. The trial court awarded additional time-sharing to the former husband, and altered the parties’ holiday time-sharing schedule. The lower court also lowered the amount of the Husband’s child support.
In the case captioned Romeo v. Romeo, the Florida Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s ruling. The Appellate Court ruled that in order to award a custody modification, a trial court must find that there has been a material, substantial, and unanticipated change of circumstances.
In the modification of custody case at bar, the trial court failed to include this finding in its Supplemental Final Judgment. Additionally, the former husband argued that the former wife agreed to a change in the parties’ time-sharing arrangement by allowing the former husband to spend time-sharing with their children on alternate Sundays. The Florida Court of Appeal stated that consent by a parent to permit the other parent to spend extra time-sharing with their children does not create a basis for a modification of time-sharing.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
A division of property and assets case involving the exclusive use and occupancy of the marital home was recently decided by the Florida Court of Appeal. In a case captioned Ortiz v. Ortiz, the husband and wife were married in 2010, and had three children. They lived in Tennessee for most of their marriage, and then moved to Florida. The parties obtained a VA loan to purchase their home in Florida. After the parties moved to Florida, the wife found employment and the husband started attending culinary school in Orlando, Florida. When the husband’s culinary school in Orlando closed, the husband moved to Miami to attend culinary school.
The wife filed for divorce. In the wife’s Petition for Dissolution of Marriage, the wife sought exclusive use and possession of the marital home. The trial court awarded the Wife exclusive use and possession of the marital home until the parties’ youngest child reached the age of eighteen or the wife remarried.
The Florida Court of Appeal affirmed the ruling of the trial court. The Florida Court of Appeal stated that the marital home, like any other asset, is subject to equitable distribution. A trial court may deviate from the presumption that there should be an equal division of property and assets and may award one of the parties exclusive use and occupancy of the marital home under the following circumstances: (i) when it is desirable to retain the marital home as a place in which the parties’ dependent children should live, (ii) when it is in the children’s best interests, (iii) when it would be equitable to award one of the parties exclusive use and occupancy of the marital home, and (iv) when the parties are financially capable of maintaining the marital home.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
In Florida, courts begin with the premise that the distribution of marital assets and liabilities will be equal. Courts look at all of the following 10 factors to determine whether an unequal division of marital assets is appropriate:
(i) whether one of the parties has made an extraordinary contribution to the marriage that is above and beyond the contribution that spouses ordinarily make to a marriage;
(ii) whether the economic circumstances of the parties warrant an unequal distribution of marital assets;
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
In order to impute income to a voluntarily unemployed or underemployed spouse, the party seeking to impute income must prove that there are current and available employment opportunities for which the spouse is qualified. The spouse’s employment potential and probable earnings are based upon the spouse’s recent work history, occupational qualifications and the prevailing earnings level in the community.
In a case captioned Douglas v. Douglas, the husband appealed several of the rulings that the trial court made in the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage. The parties were married for eight years. They were the parents of two children. The wife was a stay-at-home mother, who took care of the parties’ children during the course of the marriage. She did not work outside of the marital home during the marriage. After the parties separated, the wife unsuccessfully applied for over thirty jobs during the parties’ separation.
The husband was a professional basketball player. During his career, he played for the New York Knicks, Houston Rockets, Sacramento Kings, Golden State Warriors and the Miami Heat. Recently, the husband played on a number of European teams. The wife filed the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage.
Continue reading
Posted in:
Alimony
Tagged:
Alimony
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
All prenuptial agreements executed after October 1, 2007, must be in writing and signed by the parties. Premarital agreements executed after October 1, 2007, are not enforceable under the following circumstances. First, when the agreement was not executed voluntarily. Second, when the agreement is the product of duress, fraud, coercion or overreaching. Third, the prenuptial agreement was unconscionable at the time that it was signed and (a) the other party did not provide a reasonable disclosure of his or her assets and liabilities, (b) the party contesting the prenuptial agreement did not voluntarily waive disclosure of the other party’s assets in writing, and (c) the party contesting the prenuptial agreement did not have or reasonably could not have had sufficient knowledge of the other party’s assets and liabilities.
In a case captioned Bates v. Bates, a prenuptial agreement was successfully challenged. The facts of this case are as follows. In May of 2001, the Husband and Wife met in Colombia through a singles website. Husband was a forty-one year-old pilot. Wife was eighteen years old. Husband didn’t speak Spanish. Wife spoke little English. The parties used a translator during their initial meetings. They used a chaperone to accompany them on their dates. In June 2001, the Wife got pregnant, and the Husband paid for her to have an abortion.
As a precondition to getting married, the Husband required the Wife to execute a prenuptial agreement. Sixteen years after the parties were married, the Wife filed for divorce, and sought to invalidate the prenuptial agreement. The trial court found that the Wife was in severe pain and distress from the abortion when she signed the prenuptial agreement. Additionally, the trial court found that the Husband required the Wife to either sign the prenuptial agreement on the day before the wedding, or there was not going to be a wedding. The Wife was also told that if she did not sign the prenuptial agreement, she was not going to be permitted to immigrate to the United States.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
In an alimony case captioned Waldera v. Waldera, the trial court was presented with evidence concerning the Husband’s income during the previous ten years. However, the trial court only considered the Husband’s income during the one year period that preceded the entry of the Final Judgment. The Florida Court of Appeal ruled that this was error.
Calculating alimony was recently discussed by the Florida Court of Appeal in a case captioned Waldera v. Waldera. In Waldera v. Waldera the case, the Wife appealed the amount of the alimony that was awarded to her by the trial court in the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage. She argued that the trial judge reached an erroneous alimony determination, by improperly calculating her Husband’s income. In reaching its calculation, the trial court relied solely on the Husband’s income for one year. The Florida Court of Appeal agreed with the Wife that this was an error.
The appellate court pointed out that in making an alimony determination, a trial court is required look at all sources of income that are available to both parties. For purposes of determining alimony, income is considered to be any type of payment, regardless of the source. Income includes salary, bonuses, commissions, and earnings as an independent contractor. In awarding alimony, courts are required to consider all economic factors, including income, past earnings, net worth, and the parties’ assets. In this case, although the trial court was presented with evidence concerning the Husband’s income between 2009 and 2016, the trial court only considered the income that Husband earned during the year preceding the entry of the Final Judgment for Dissolution of Marriage. The appellate court pointed out that there is a presumption that a payor will continue to earn the same amount that he or she has historically earned, unless there is evidence to the contrary.
Continue reading
March 19, 2025
by SmartSites
Florida’s alimony statute requires courts to consider the standard of living that was established by the parties throughout the course of their marriage. Its purpose is to provide for the needs and necessities of life for the recipient spouse as they were established during the course of the parties’ marriage. It is one of eleven statutory factors that Florida Courts are required to consider in awarding alimony.
In a recently decided case captioned Morgan v. Morgan, the Florida Court of Appeal ruled that the size of an alimony award is based upon the standard of living that was established by the parties during the course of the marriage, and not the parties’ postseparation lifestyle.
In Morgan v. Morgan, the husband appealed the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. He challenged the trial court’s alimony award and the equitable distribution of the parties’ assets. The Florida Court of Appeal reversed both of the trial court’s rulings on these issues.
Continue reading
Posted in:
Alimony
Tagged:
Alimony
