tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-82650742674317597482024-02-20T14:51:28.607-05:00Family Law RightsFamily Law Rights Blog -
Your Source For Information On Florida Family Law Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-64368159889034776122014-03-26T11:47:00.004-04:002014-03-26T12:33:17.468-04:00Florida Psychotherapist Patient Privilege: Protecting Mental Health Records in Divorces and other Family Law Cases<div style="text-align: justify;">
Divorce and family law cases sometimes get ugly. And, in ugly cases, it is not uncommon for one or both of the parties to have a personality disorder or other mental health condition. Under certain circumstances, a party's mental health is legitimately relevant to a proper determination of <a href="http://familylawrights.blogspot.com/p/florida-child-custody-factors-for.html" target="_blank">child custody</a> or <a href="http://familylawrights.blogspot.com/p/florida-alimony-factors.html" target="_blank">alimony</a>. Many times, however, there are improper motivations for seeking confidential mental health records and information. Your <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/CM/Custom/Attorneys.asp" target="_blank">family law attorney</a> should know when this evidence is subject to discovery.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A party to a divorce or family law proceeding normally has the right to prevent disclosure of communications or records made for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of a mental or emotional condition, including alcoholism and other drug addiction. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0090/Sections/0090.503.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 90.503(2)</a>. This privilege applies to communications between a patient and a psychotherapist, or persons who are participating in the diagnosis or treatment under the direction of the psychotherapist. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0090/Sections/0090.503.html" target="_blank"><i>Id</i></a>. The term "psychotherapist" is broadly defined, and includes doctors, psychologists, therapists, social workers, drug and alcohol abuse counselors, and nurse practitioners who are engaged primarily in the diagnosis or treatment of a mental or emotional condition. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0090/Sections/0090.503.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 90.503(1)(a)</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This psychotherapist-patient privilege, however, is not absolute. In a child custody dispute, the mental and physical health of both parents is a factor that must be considered by the trial judge in determining the best interests of the children. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17278765420298215481&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Leonard v. Leonard</i>, 673 So. 2d 97, 99 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)</a>. A party does not waive the psychotherapist-patient privilege merely by seeking child custody. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17278765420298215481&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Leonard</i>, 673 So. 2d at 99</a>. But, in situations where a calamitous event such as an attempted suicide occurs during a pending custody dispute have courts have found that the mental health of the parent is sufficiently at issue to warrant an exception to the statutory privilege. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10357172373791733155&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See, e.g.</i>, <i>Miraglia v. Miraglia</i>, 462 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2039783428046395657&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Critchlow v. Critchlow</i>, 347 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)</a>. <br />
<br />
In extreme circumstances, evidence concerning the party's mental health is so vital to a proper determination of custody that a patient-litigant exception to the privilege is justified. <i>Id</i>. The rationale for this exception is that a litigant waives the psychotherapist-patient privilege by proceeding on a claim for custody where the party's mental condition is an essential element.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Absent a "calamitous event," the law requires courts to preserve the privilege. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11972684409518014381&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See, e.g., Koch v. Koch</i>, 961 So. 2d 1134, 1135 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)</a>. Courts will not find a waiver of the privilege based on mere allegations of mental or emotional instability. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17278765420298215481&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Leonard</i>, 673 So. 2d at 99</a>. Competent substantial evidence is required. "To hold otherwise would eviscerate the privilege; a party seeking privileged information would obtain it simply by alleging mental infirmity." <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17634112846625360343&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Peisach v. Antuna</i>, 539 So. 2d 544, 546 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If evidence of mental health is still necessary in a custody case, the more appropriate method of securing the information is to require an independent psychological or psychiatric examination of the parent or parents. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9412213059171986763&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Schouw v. Schouw</i>, 593 So. 2d 1200, 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)</a>. In this way, the trial court balances the need to determine the parents' mental health as it relates to the best interest of the child, and the need to maintain the confidentiality between a treating psychotherapist and the patient. <i>Id</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Courts have also upheld the psychotherapist-patient privilege when a parent is trying to obtain information or records concerning a child's mental health. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6816557488760591101&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Attorney ad Litem for D.K. v. Parents of D.K</i>., 780 So. 2d 301, 307 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6839755880334432998&q=child+psychological+records+privilege+therapy&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>see also Kasdaglis v. Dep't of Health</i>, 827 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)</a> (holding that social worker is under no obligation to furnish privileged therapy records of a sixteen year old to the child's mother without the child's consent). The statutory privilege applies to children, and parents do not have standing to waive the privilege. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6816557488760591101&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Attorney ad Litem for D.K.</i>, 780 So. 2d at 307</a>. If a child lacks the age or maturity to make a decision concerning the waiver or invocation of the privilege, the court should appoint an attorney <i>ad litem</i> for the child. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6816557488760591101&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i>. at 308</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In <i>Attorney ad Litem for DK</i>, the court explained its reasoning:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
We recognize the tension apparent in the law between the rights and responsibilities of parents and the rights of children. Certainly, to promote strong families, parents should be involved and active in the lives of their children, including their health care, for which the parents are held responsible. Unfortunately, sometimes the parents are the cause of abuse, both emotional and physical, of their children. Allowing parents complete access to their children's health care records under all circumstances may inhibit the child from seeking or succeeding in treatment. The tension between the child's need for confidentiality and privacy to promote healing may conflict with the need of the court for information to inform its judgment as to the child's best interest. </blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6816557488760591101&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Attorney ad Litem for D.K.</i>, 780 So. 2d at 308</a>. Courts have also held that even a court appointed guardian <i>ad litem </i>for the child may be excluded from accessing the child's confidential mental health records.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you have questions about how mental health issues might affect your rights in a family law case, contact an experienced <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/CM/Custom/Attorneys.asp" target="_blank">Florida family law attorney</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-16587667916949013962014-03-26T08:52:00.000-04:002014-03-26T08:52:18.946-04:00Equitable Distribution: The Marital Interest in a Non-Marital Property or Premarital Home<div style="text-align: justify;">
As couples marry later in life or have second marriages, one or both of the parties may already own a home. As a result, in many divorce cases, the parties live in a home owned solely by one of the parties. In these cases, a common question is whether the non-owner spouse has any interest in the home.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Equitable distribution in Florida is governed by <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.075.html" target="_blank">section 61.075, Florida Statutes</a>. When dealing with the division of a couple's assets and liabilities, the first step in the analysis is for the court to set aside any non-marital assets and liabilities. The court is then tasked with distributing the marital assets and liabilities between the parties, with the premise that such assets and liabilities should be divided equally.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Under <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.075.html" target="_blank">section 61.075(6)(a)(1)(b), Florida Statutes</a>, marital assets are defined to include the "enhancement in value and appreciation of nonmarital assets resulting either from the efforts of either party during the marriage or from the contribution to or expenditure thereon of marital funds or other forms of marital assets, or both."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If marital funds are used to enhance a non-marital asset, the value the enhancement is therefore marital. Accordingly, if the parties built a home on non-marital property, the enhanced value relating to the structure is marital. The relevant statutory language also clearly provides that, under certain circumstances, the appreciation of a non-marital asset is indeed a marital asset. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=160736068290469807&hl=en&as_sdt=40005&sciodt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Kaaa v. Kaaa</i>, 58 So. 3d 867, 870 (Fla. 2010)</a>. In particular, the passive appreciation of a non-marital asset, such as a home, is properly considered a marital asset where marital funds or the efforts of either party contributed to the appreciation. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=160736068290469807&hl=en&as_sdt=40005&sciodt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i></a>. The Florida Supreme Court has held that, if one party uses marital funds to pay the mortgage on a non-marital property and the non-owner spouse makes "contributions" to the property, some portion of the passive appreciation on the home is subject to equitable distribution. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=160736068290469807&hl=en&as_sdt=40005&sciodt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i>. at 871</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Florida Supreme Court adopted the following methodology for determining how the appreciated value is properly allocated between the parties:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
If a separate asset is unencumbered and no marital funds are used to finance its acquisition, improvement, or maintenance, no portion of its value should ordinarily be included in the marital estate, absent improvements effected by marital labor. If an asset is financed entirely by borrowed money which marital funds repay, the entire asset should be included in the marital estate. In general, in the absence of improvements, the portion of the appreciated value of a separate asset which should be treated as a marital asset will be the same as the fraction calculated by dividing the indebtedness with which the asset was encumbered at the time of the marriage by the value of the asset at the time of the marriage. If, for example, one party brings to the marriage an asset in which he or she has an equity of fifty percent, the other half of which is financed by marital funds, half the appreciated value at the time of the petition for dissolution was filed, § 61.075(5)(a) 2, Fla. Stat. (1993), should be included as a marital asset. The value of this marital asset should be reduced, however, by the unpaid indebtedness marital funds were used to service.</blockquote>
<a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=160736068290469807&hl=en&as_sdt=40005&sciodt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Kaaa</i>, 58 So. 3d at 872</a>.<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Thus, when non-marital real property is encumbered by a mortgage that was paid by marital funds, a pro-rata portion of the passive appreciation in the property's value that accrues during the course of the marriage is a marital asset subject to equitable distribution.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you have questions concerning your <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Property-Division-Business-Ownership-Valuation.asp" target="_blank">Florida equitable distribution or property division rights</a>, please contact an experienced <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/Bio/RichardMockler.asp" target="_blank">Tampa family law attorney</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
By Richard Mockler</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-89439221316637498882014-03-16T14:08:00.000-04:002014-03-16T14:49:43.678-04:00Florida Alimony and Alimony Reform<div style="text-align: justify;">
Most clients accept that they will have to split their joint assets in a divorce. But, four issues really seem to strike a nerve in men. Military divorce clients typically find it very hard to accept that their spouse is going to leave them and take half of the marital portion of the military retirement. Many fathers cannot understand why mothers still have an upper hand in custody disputes. And, no one wants to pay their spouse's legal fees. But, the most controversial part of many divorces is the issue of alimony.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Parties seeking alimony feel that they are entitled to maintain the standard of living achieved during the marriage. Ironically, in many cases, the standard of living led to the downfall of the marriage in the first place. And, unfortunately, for most couples, it is impossible to maintain two households at the same standard previously achieved in one. Further, many people have financed their lifestyle by accumulating debt or failing to save. As couples age, their need for savings becomes more important. Alimony typically destroys both parties’ ability to save for retirement.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Many clients argue that the party seeking alimony would not need it (or at least not nearly as much of it) if they would just go back to work. And, where a non-working mother is seeking alimony, it seems that judges are quick to assume that the parties agreed for the wife to stay home with the children. Even if the husband agreed for her to stop working, the agreement was rarely meant to be “permanent.” Some women choose – against their husband’s wishes – to stay home much longer than their partner ever anticipated. These women feel it is “necessary” for them to stay home, even after the child has started school.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When the parties cannot agree on how much alimony is appropriate or how the requesting party should receive alimony, the court will have to award alimony pursuant to the standards set forth in <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.08.html" target="_blank">section 61.08, Florida Statutes</a>.<br />
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Types of Florida Alimony</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In a divorce case, the court may grant bridge-the-gap alimony, rehabilitative alimony, durational alimony, permanent alimony, or any combination of these forms of alimony. In any award of alimony, the court may order periodic payments or payments in lump sum or both. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.08.html" target="_blank"><i>See</i> Fla. Stat. § 61.08</a>.<br />
<br /></div>
<h4 style="text-align: justify;">
Bridge-the-Gap Alimony</h4>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Bridge-the-gap alimony is an award of alimony for a set duration of time to assist the party in need with the transition from married life to single life. This alimony is not subject to modification and may be awarded for up to 2 years.<br />
<br /></div>
<h4 style="text-align: justify;">
Rehabilitative Alimony</h4>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rehabilitative alimony is intended to assist a party in achieving the means necessary to support herself after the marriage. The party seeking rehabilitative alimony must propose a “plan” to the court outlining what she intends to do to increase her earning capability, how the training will help her financially, how long the training will take, and how much the training will cost. Rehabilitative alimony may be modified or terminated if the wife does not attend the courses as proposed in the rehabilitative plan.<br />
<br /></div>
<h4 style="text-align: justify;">
Durational Alimony</h4>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Durational alimony was created by the Florida legislature in 2010. The purpose of durational alimony is to provide periodic support to a spouse for a number of years, not to exceed the duration of the marriage, which is measure from the date or marriage to the date of filing for divorce. The amount of alimony awarded each month is subject to modification if one of the parties experiences a substantial change of circumstances, including an unanticipated change in need or ability to pay, death of either party, or remarriage of the payee. The duration of the alimony award is not subject to modification, except in exceptional circumstances.<br />
<br /></div>
<h4 style="text-align: justify;">
Permanent Periodic Alimony</h4>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Permanent period alimony is an award of alimony, typically on a monthly basis, that continues indefinitely. Permanent alimony terminates on the death of either party or upon the remarriage of the recipient. Permanent alimony is also subject to modification if the recipient spouse is in a supportive relationship. Some parties may be eligible to terminate their alimony obligation upon retirement if there are not sufficient income-producing assets for the retiree to continue paying the alimony.<br />
<br /></div>
<h4 style="text-align: justify;">
Lump Sum Alimony</h4>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lump sum alimony is awarded where it is appropriate for the court to award a fixed sum of alimony to one spouse. This may be appropriate where one party divests himself of the ability to earn income and pay alimony. It may also be appropriate where one party is ordered to pay off certain marital debts. Lump sum alimony may be payed in installments but it may not be terminated, even upon death or remarriage.<br />
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Florida Alimony Factors</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In determining whether to award alimony, <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.08.html" target="_blank">section 61.08, Florida Statutes</a>, requires that the court must first make a specific factual determination as to whether either party has an actual need for alimony and whether the other party has the ability to pay alimony.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If the court finds that one party has a need for alimony and that the other party has the ability to pay alimony, then in determining the proper type and amount of alimony, the court must consider all relevant factors, including but not limited to the following:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<ol>
<li>The standard of living established during the marriage.</li>
<li>The duration of the marriage.</li>
<li>The age and the physical and emotional condition of each party.</li>
<li>The financial resources of each party, including the non-marital and the marital assets and liabilities distributed to each.</li>
<li>The earning capacities, educational levels, vocational skills, and employability of the parties and, when applicable, the time necessary for either party to acquire sufficient education or training to enable such party to find appropriate employment.</li>
<li>The contribution of each party to the marriage, including, but not limited to, services rendered in homemaking, child care, education, and career building of the other party.</li>
<li>The responsibilities each party will have with regard to any minor children they have in common.</li>
<li>The tax treatment and consequences to both parties of any alimony award, including the designation of all or a portion of the payment as a nontaxable, nondeductible payment.</li>
<li>All sources of income available to either party, including income available to either party through investments of any asset held by that party.</li>
<li>Any other factor necessary to do equity and justice between the parties.</li>
</ol>
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">
Florida Alimony Reform</h3>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In 2013, the Florida Legislature passed significant alimony reform laws. To the shock of many, including those for and against alimony reform, Governor Rick Scott vetoed the legislation. A letter from Governor Scott made clear that he believed the alimony reform legislation was anti-family, especially certain provisions that would allow courts to modify prior alimony awards.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With 2014 being an election year, the Governor has also made clear that he does not want to reconsider the controversial bill, which could potentially alienate roughly half of Florida voters. But, we have not seen the last of Florida’s alimony reform movement. Look for proponents of alimony reform to return next year, especially if Governor Scott wins re-election.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The 2013 alimony reform legislation would have changed how the courts classify short-term, moderate-term, and long-term marriages. The current alimony statute defines a marriage of less than 7 years as short-term, a marriage of 7 to 17 years as moderate-term, and a marriage lasting 17 years or more as long-term. There is currently a presumption in favor of awarding permanent alimony after long-term marriages, and there is a presumption against permanent alimony after short-term marriages.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The 2013 alimony reform bill also would have changed the marriage classifications as follows: (a) any marriage lasting less than 11 years would be a short-term marriage, (b) any marriage lasting between 11 and 20 years would be a moderate-term marriage, and (c) only those marriage lasting more than 21 years would be considered long-term. Significantly, the proposed 2013 legislation would have created a presumption against awarding alimony in short-term marriages. And, while the bill maintained a presumption in favor of alimony in long-term marriages, it would have eliminated the concept of permanent periodic alimony.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The 2013 proposed alimony reform also placed significant limits on awards of durational alimony. Specifically, under <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.08.html" target="_blank">current law</a>, durational alimony may be awarded for as many years as the parties were married. The 2013 alimony reform bill would have presumptively capped durational alimony at half the duration of the marriage. In other words, a party that was married 14 years could receive alimony for no more than 7 years. Courts only would have had discretion to exceed this cap in cases where the need is justified by exceptional circumstances.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Under existing alimony law, there are no statutory limits on the amount of alimony that may be awarded, except that the alimony award cannot exceed 50% of the payor's gross income and cannot result in the recipient have significantly more income than the payor. The 2013 alimony reform would have imposed lower caps on the amount of alimony that could be awarded. Alimony would have been capped at the following percentages: (a) 25% of the payor's gross income for short-term marriages; (b) 35% of the payor's gross income for moderate-term marriages; and (c) 38% of the payor's gross income in long-term marriages.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is no guarantee that the same framework will be included in future attempts at alimony reform. The 2013 alimony reform bill was strongly supported in the legislature. But, the bill was most likely vetoed due to the controversial provisions that allowed courts to modify past alimony awards.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you have questions about alimony, cohabitation, termination of alimony, or alimony modifications, please contact an experienced <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/CM/Custom/Attorneys.asp" target="_blank">Florida family law attorney</a>.</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<header class="entry-header" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #444444; font-family: 'Open Sans', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 14px; margin: 0px 0px 1.714285714rem; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
</header>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-67107067307154339232014-03-13T00:55:00.000-04:002014-03-14T07:31:35.827-04:00Florida Law on Morality, Adultery, Homosexuality, and Child Custody<div style="text-align: justify;">
Under Florida law, Courts are required to make all parenting decisions based on the child's best interests. The Florida legislature has set out <a href="http://familylawrights.blogspot.com/p/florida-child-custody-factors-for.html" target="_blank">20 factors</a> for courts to consider when establishing a parenting plan or making a parenting or custody determination. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.13.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3)</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The parenting factors address many issues, such as which parent is more willing to share time, handles more of the parenting responsibilities, acts on the interest of the child, has been caring for the child, demonstrates knowledge of the child's circumstances, provides a consistent routine, communicates with the other parent, avoids violence, and maintains a home free of substance abuse. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.13.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3)</a>. These considerations are largely non-controversial.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Courts are also required to consider the "moral fitness of the parents." <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.13.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3)(f)</a>. This factor is extremely subjective, and it does not frequently play a significant role in custody determinations.<br />
<br />
For the trial court to consider a parent’s "moral fitness" in connection with establishing a parenting plan or determining parental responsibility, the conduct in question must have a “direct effect or impact” upon the minor child. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12090173944142141016&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Smith v. Smith</i>, 39 So. 3d 458, 460 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)</a>. Moreover, the connection between the conduct and the harm to the child must have an evidentiary basis. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12090173944142141016&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See id</i></a>. (quoting <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12090173944142141016&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Jacoby v. Jacoby</i>, 763 So.2d 410, 413 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)</a>); <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1059341361270505351&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>see also Willis v. Willis</i>, 818 So. 2d 530, 533 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)</a>. “A connection between the actions of the parent and the harm to the child...cannot be assumed.” <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13858149761580686047&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Packard v. Packard</i>, 697 So. 2d 1292, 1293 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)</a>.<br />
<br />
In cases where a parent has engaged in adultery, the other parent may argue that the court should consider the adultery when making a determination of time-sharing or parental responsibility. When adultery is at issue, the act of adultery should not be taken into consideration in determining custody unless the trial court finds that the adultery has a direct bearing on the child’s welfare. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12090173944142141016&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Smith</i>, 39 So. 3d at 461</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=139673867799713051&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Dinkel v. Dinkel</i>, 322 So. 2d 22, 24 (Fla. 1975)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1059341361270505351&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Willis</i>, 818 So. 2d at 533</a>. Marital misconduct is not necessarily an appropriate standard for determining the best interests of the child. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13324216705022663490&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Farrow v. Farrow</i>, 263 So. 2d 588, 590 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16319422240405136742&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>McAnespie v. McAnespie</i>, 200 So. 2d 606, 609 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)</a>. A parent who commits adultery may very well be better suited to parent the child. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1059341361270505351&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Willis</i>, 818 So. 2d at 533</a>. “Adultery may or may not have any direct bearing on the welfare of a child of tender years.” <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1059341361270505351&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i></a>. The mere possibility of a negative impact on the child is not sufficient. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1059341361270505351&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Willis</i>, 818 So. 2d at 533</a>.<br />
<br />
Florida courts have also rejected any notion that the potential for societal disapproval for immoral behavior may be used as a justification for favoring one parent in a custody case. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12576907399385592737&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See Lofton v. Sec’y. of the Dept. of Children and Family Services</i>, 377 F.3d 1275, 1300 (Anderson, J., dissenting from the Denial of Rehearing En Banc)</a> (citing <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11470966759710479877&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Maradie v. Maradie</i>, 680 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)</a>).<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11470966759710479877&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Maradie v. Maradie</i>, 680 So. 2d 538, 540 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)</a>, the parties presented considerable testimony about the sexual conduct of each parent and its relation to the parent's "moral fitness" under <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.13.html" target="_blank">section 61.13(3)(f), Florida Statutes</a>. Among other things, the former husband presented evidence that his former wife was bisexual and had been involved in lesbian relationships. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11470966759710479877&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The court-appointed psychologist testified, however, that there was no evidence that the former wife's sexual orientation impaired her parenting ability or had negatively impacted the child. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11470966759710479877&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. Nevertheless, the trial court awarded custody of the parties' daughter to the former husband. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11470966759710479877&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The trial court based its decision on the following reasoning:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The testimony reveals that Mrs. Maradie, with her homosexual lover, spend nights and sleep together in the same bed, kiss, hold hands and speak in terms of endearment in front of the child. The possibility of negative impact on the child, especially as she grows older and reaches her late pre-teen and early teen years, is considerable. The Court does not have to have expert evidence to reach this conclusion, but can take judicial notice that a homosexual environment is not a traditional home environment, and can adversely affect a child. To say that this cannot be considered until there is actual proof that it has occurred is asking the Court to abdicate its common sense and responsible decision-making endeavors.</blockquote>
<a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11470966759710479877&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank">Maradie, 680 So. 2d at 540-41</a>. Florida's First District Court of Appeal explained that the trial court was permitted to consider a parent's sexual conduct in determining the parent's moral fitness under section 61.13(3)(f). The trial court, however, was required to focus on whether the parent's behavior had a direct impact on the welfare of the child. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11470966759710479877&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Id</i>. at 541</a>. The trial court certainly was not permitted to take "judicial notice" of the "fact" that a homosexual environment is not traditional and can adversely affect a child. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11470966759710479877&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Id</i></a>. Accordingly, the First District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's decision to award custody to the former husband and its decision to take "judicial notice" that being raised in the presence of homosexuality can adversely affect a child. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11470966759710479877&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Id</i></a>.<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18258194807982578880&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Ward v. Ward</i>, 742 So. 2d 250, 254 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)</a>, Florida's First District Court of Appeal again clarified that the sexual orientation of the custodial parent does not, by itself, justify a custody change. In <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18258194807982578880&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Ward</a></i>, the trial court changed custody from the former wife, who was a lesbian, to the former husband, who was previously <i>convicted of second degree murder for killing his first wife</i>. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18258194807982578880&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id. </i>at <i>252.</i></a> On appeal, Florida's First District Court of Appeal found that the trial court was not focused on the fact that the former wife was a lesbian, but rather on the best interests of the child. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18258194807982578880&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The trial court concluded that the former wife was involved in a relationship that directly and adversely affected the child. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18258194807982578880&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i>. at 254</a>. The First District Court of Appeal held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by changing custody because the determination was without regard to the sexual orientation of that relationship. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18258194807982578880&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i></a>.<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13858149761580686047&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Packard v. Packard</i>, 697 So. 2d 1292, 1293 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)</a>, the trial court awarded custody to the former husband where the wife was a lesbian living with a woman who was previously involved in a <i>menage a trois</i> with the parties during their marriage. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13858149761580686047&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. Remarkably, at the time of the divorce, the former husband was living with his new girlfriend, her children, and the parties' daughters. On appeal, the former wife argued that the trial court based its custody decision solely on her sexual orientation. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13858149761580686047&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The former husband's living arrangements were also fairly viewed as "untraditional." <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13858149761580686047&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The former wife argued that it was therefore discriminatory for the trial court to base its custody determination on the finding that a more "traditional family environment" would be provided by the former husband. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13858149761580686047&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. Florida's First District Court of Appeal again explained that the trial court may consider a parent's sexual conduct in determining the parent's moral fitness under <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.13.html" target="_blank">section 61.13(3)(f), Florida Statutes</a>, but that in such consideration "the trial court should focus on whether the parent's behavior has a direct impact on the welfare of the child." <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13858149761580686047&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. In other words, the trial court's primary consideration must be on the conduct involved and whether the conduct has had or is reasonably likely to have an adverse impact on the child, as opposed to weighing which household was more or less "traditional." <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13858149761580686047&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's custody determination and remanded the case with instructions to follow the foregoing principles when considering the parties' moral fitness. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13858149761580686047&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>.<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Jacoby v. Jacoby</i>, 763 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)</a>, the former husband's case was centered largely on attacking the former wife based on her sexual orientation. The trial court made remarks about the negative impact of the mother's sexual orientation on the children. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i>. at 413</a>. The Second District Court of Appeal found that the trial court's negative comments were conclusory and unsupported by the evidence. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i></a>. Specifically, the trial court found that "the community" shared the former husband's belief that homosexuals are immoral and should not be entrusted to rear children. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The trial court further found that a "strong stigma" attaches to homosexuality and that while being reared in a homosexual environment does not appear to alter sexual preference, it does affect social interaction and that it is likely that the children's peers or their parents will have negative words or thoughts. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The Second District Court of Appeal, however, found that even if the trial court's comments about the community's beliefs and possible reactions were correct and supported by the evidence, "the law cannot give effect to private biases." <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. With respect to the custody decision, the Second District further reasoned that "even if the law were to permit consideration of the biases of others, and even if we were to accept the assumption that such would necessarily harm the children, the bias and ensuing harm would flow not from the fact that the children were living with a homosexual mother, but from the fact that she is a homosexual." <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The Second District Court of Appeal held that the trial court's "reliance on perceived biases was an improper basis for a residential custody determination." <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. The trial court also improperly concluded that the children's exposure to the Baptist religion coupled with living with a homosexual parent would necessarily create confusion for the children. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i>. at 414</a>. The lower court also made a number of other leaping conclusions in support of its decision to award custody to the heterosexual father. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id. </i>at 414-15</a>. None of these jumps to conclusion were supported by the evidence, and the Second District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's decision. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id. </i>at 414-15</a>. In short, when making its custody determination, the trial court impermissibly penalized the mother for her sexual orientation without evidence that it harmed the children. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16038051109836592967&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>Id</i>. at 415</a>.<br />
<br />
All of these decisions by the Florida courts make clear that homosexuality alone cannot be the basis for an adverse custody decision. The trial court must link any allegedly "immoral behavior" to a direct affect on the minor child. That connection must be supported by evidence in the record. The link cannot be the product of speculation or "judicial notice." In other words, before a court can make any judgment concerning a party's homosexual or other allegedly "immoral" conduct, the court must be prepared to explain how the conduct at issue directly impacted the minor child.<br />
<br />
If you have questions about child custody issues in Florida, please contact an experienced <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/Bio/RichardMockler.asp" target="_blank">Florida family law attorney</a>.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-10613353865112377062014-03-07T21:56:00.000-05:002014-03-08T09:16:46.676-05:00Can a Florida Court Extend Child Support Beyond Age 18?<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The duty to provide support for a minor child is based upon the child's incapacity, both natural and legal, and the child's need of protection and care. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=continue+child+support+for+disabled+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=9193784876941704653&scilh=0" style="line-height: 18px;" target="_blank"><i>See Kern v. Kern</i>, 360 So.2d 482, 484 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978).</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Court have recognized that a parent's legal duty to support his children ordinarily ceases at the age of majority. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=continue+child+support+for+disabled+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=3597607445360304607&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>Perla v. Perla</i>, 58 So. 2d 689, 690 (Fla. 1952)</a>. A parent, however, owes a duty of support to an adult child in extraordinary circumstances, such as when the child suffers severe physical or mental incapacitation. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9193784876941704653&q=kern+v.+kern&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>See Kern v. Kern</i>, 360 So. 2d 482, 486 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)</a>.</span><br />
<div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In 1973, the Florida legislature lowered the age of majority from 21 to 18. <a href="http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2013/743.07" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 743.07</a>. More recently, the Florida child support statute was modified to require all family law judgments awarding child support to include the following provisions: </span><br />
<ol>
<li><span style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 18px;">That the child support for each child will terminate on the child’s 18th birthday unless the court finds that section 743.07(2) applies, or is otherwise agreed to by the parties; </span></span></li>
<li><span style="color: #222222; font-family: inherit; line-height: 18px;">A schedule stating the amount of the monthly child support obligation for all the minor children and the amount of child support that will be owed for any remaining children after one or more of the children are no longer entitled to support; and </span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #222222; line-height: 18px;">The date that the reduction or termination of child support becomes effective.</span><span style="color: #222222; line-height: 18px;"> </span></span></li>
</ol>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2013/61.13" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.13(1)(a)</a>. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In other words, <a href="http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2013/61.13" target="_blank">section 61.13, Florida Statutes</a>, requires that a payor's child support obligation automatically adjusts downward as each child reaches his or her 18th birthday.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The Florida legislature has also codified when a support obligation may be extended beyond 18 years of age. Specifically, <a href="http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2013/743.07" target="_blank">section 743.07, Florida Statutes</a>, states that child support may be extended beyond age 18 in two situations: (a) where a child is dependent due to mental or physical incapacity that began prior to age 18; and (b) where a child has reached the age of majority, is living at home, attending high school, and reasonably expects to graduate high school before age 19. This language was added to the statute effective October 1, 1988. </span><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2270986608804949789&q=supplemental+petition+to+extend+child+support+filed+before+child+18+birthday&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>See Penton v. Penton</i>, 564 So. 2d 1114, 1115 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)</a>. <span style="font-family: inherit;">Courts have recognized that these two situations are separate bases to extend child support beyond age 18. </span><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8077915681368160707&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" style="font-family: inherit;" target="_blank"><i>See Miller v. Smart</i>, 636 So. 2d 836, 837 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)</a><span style="font-family: inherit;">.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The difficult question is under what circumstances might a mental or physical incapacity justify an extension of child support? The statutory uses the word "dependent." Obviously, the word dependent suggests that a parent will not owe support if the child is out working and self-supporting. The answer is less clear where a child is moderately incapacitated and living at home. A troubling example might be a child living at home and suffering from a mild physical disability or a moderate psychological disorder. In <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9193784876941704653&q=kern+v.+kern&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Kern v. Kern</i>, 360 So. 2d 482, 486 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)</a>, Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal held that a dependent child must suffer from a "severe physical or mental incapacity." </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Decisions subsequent to <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9193784876941704653&q=kern+v.+kern&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank">Kern</a></i> that discuss whether an adult child is "dependent" within the meaning of section 743.07, Florida Statutes, have not used the words "suffering" or "severe" when describing the child's mental or physical incapacity. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9595666358258659331&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See, e.g</i>., <i>Carres v. Good-Earnest</i>, 838 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8077915681368160707&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Miller v. Smart</i>, 636 So. 2d 836, 837 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)</a>. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
In <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2270986608804949789&q=supplemental+petition+to+extend+child+support+filed+before+child+18+birthday&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Penton v. Penton</i>, 564 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)</a>, the court awarded child support beyond the age of majority due to the child's mental and emotional condition. In <i>Penton</i>, the parties' son was a sophomore in high school at the time of the divorce. The first district concluded that the son suffered "psychological infirmities" due to the stress stemming from the divorce and was being treated by a mental health professional. The child's emotional condition constituted a dependency, which, when coupled with his economic incapacity, was sufficient to require support beyond the age of majority.<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16816518431993963267&q=supplemental+petition+to+extend+child+support+filed+before+child+18+birthday&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Pitts v. Pitts</i>, 566 So. 2d 12, 13 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)</a>, the parties' child suffered from learning disabilities, which required him to devote most of his time to his studies. The court found that the child could not work to support himself while he was in school due to his learning disability. This decision is noteworthy because the child's disability appeared relatively modest. <br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Regardless of whether the physical or mental incapacity is "severe," under <a href="http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2013/743.07" target="_blank">section 743.07, Florida Statutes</a>, the incapacity must result in the child's "dependency." Some practitioners and judges may equate "dependency" with "disability." And, this would be a fair analogy given that the child must suffer from an incapacity that rises to the level of dependency. Finally, the incapacity - whatever it might be - must have rendered the child dependent prior to his or her attaining the age of majority. A</span><span style="font-family: inherit;">ny supplemental petition to extend child support must be filed before the support obligation terminates.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<br />
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-60035914140937624292014-03-06T23:10:00.001-05:002014-03-06T23:24:40.438-05:00What is the Deadline for Filing a Motion for Rehearing or New Trial under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure?<div style="text-align: justify;">
When you practice law for a long time, you get comfortable with the rules. Many attorneys do not consult their rule books frequently. Some lawyers don't buy a new copy of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When the rules of procedure change, there is typically little fanfare. The Florida Supreme Court amends the rules by publishing <a href="http://www.floridalawweekly.com/forms/sc13-74.pdf" target="_blank">an opinion of the court</a>. On certain occasions, such as the implementation of new rules concerning electronic discovery, the implementation of email service, or the advent of electronic filing, there are articles, updates, or talk among lawyers.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of the most rigid deadlines in the law is the deadline for filing a motion for rehearing or new trial. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=1.530+motion+rehearing+10+days+deadline+jurisdiction&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=10838126303440523469&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>See</i>, <i>e</i>.<i>g</i>., <i>Migliore v. Migliore</i>, 717 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)</a> (holding that that the attorney missed the deadline where he timely filed the motion but the postmark suggested that it was actually served after the 10-day deadline). This deadline is also important because filing a timely motion for rehearing or new trial also tolls the deadline for filing a notice of appeal.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On January 1, 2014, <a href="http://floridacivpro.com/rules/1-530-motions-for-new-trial-and-rehearing-amendments-of-judgments/" target="_blank">Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530</a> was amended to extend the time for seeking rehearing or a new trial. The deadline for serving the motion was increased from 10 days to 15 days. This is a very significant move, as the deadline had been 10 days since the rule was first adopted. And, the time limit in this rule had been relatively short and not subject to extension.<br />
<br />
The <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBResources.nsf/0/416879C4A88CBF0485256B29004BFAF8/$FILE/311%20Family%20Law.pdf?OpenElement" target="_blank">Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure</a> were also amended to incorporate Rule 1.530's new 15-day deadlines.<br />
<br />
For an interesting discussion regarding the difference between a motion for rehearing and a motion for reconsideration, please look at this <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/divcom/jn/jnjournal01.nsf/Author/0020FF826AD66C5F852575C50049D2B4" target="_blank">Florida Bar article</a>.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-22233341543569852232014-03-06T22:27:00.002-05:002014-03-06T22:50:46.119-05:00When Can A Witness Appear by Phone or Video in a Florida Court Hearing?<div style="text-align: justify;">
Historically, Florida law has allowed a party or witness to testify by phone or video conference only when the parties agreed. <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBResources.nsf/Attachments/F854D695BA7136B085257316005E7DE7/$FILE/Judicial.pdf" target="_blank">Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.530(d)(1)</a> provides that a "county or circuit court judge may, if all the parties consent, allow testimony to be taken through communication equipment." </div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Case law interpreting this rule held that, under <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBResources.nsf/Attachments/F854D695BA7136B085257316005E7DE7/$FILE/Judicial.pdf" target="_blank">Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.530(d)(1)</a>, a trial court's only has discretion to allow testimony to be taken over the phone if all of the parties consent. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=Cole+v.+Cole,+86+So.+3d+1175&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=5534850661615021042&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>See Cole v. Cole</i>, 86 So. 3d 1175 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)</a>. If the judge allowed a party to testify by phone over the objection of another party, the trial court committed error. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=Cole+v.+Cole,+86+So.+3d+1175&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=5534850661615021042&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>See Cole</i>, 86 So. 3d at 1176</a> (citing <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13515565382842248173&q=Cole+v.+Cole,+86+So.+3d+1175&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>S.A. v. Dep't of Children and Family Servs</i>., 961 So. 2d 1066, 1067 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)</a>). Although many judges thought that they had some discretion to allow telephonic appearances under the Rules of Judicial Administration, there was simply no such discretion. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5361873716098291158&hl=en&as_sdt=40006" target="_blank"><i>See M.S. v. Dep't of Children and Families</i>, 6 So. 3d 102, 103 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)</a>.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In civil cases, the Florida Supreme Court recently changed the law governing witness testimony via telephone and video. <a href="http://floridacivpro.com/rules/1-451-taking-testimony/" target="_blank">Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.451</a>, titled Taking Testimony, is effective January 1, 2014.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The general rule remains that, when testifying at a hearing or trial, "a witness must be physically present unless otherwise provided by law or rule of procedure." <a href="http://floridacivpro.com/rules/1-451-taking-testimony/" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.451(a)</a>.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Under <a href="http://floridacivpro.com/rules/1-451-taking-testimony/" target="_blank">Rule 1.451(b)</a>, however, the court may permit a witness to testify at a hearing or trial by contemporaneous audio or video communication equipment (i) by agreement of the parties or (ii) for good cause shown upon written request of a party. The written request must give reasonable advance notice. The request must also contain "the substance of the proposed testimony and an estimate of the length of the proposed testimony." In considering sufficient good cause, the court must weigh and address in its order the reasons stated for testimony by communication equipment against the potential for prejudice to the objecting party.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For purposes of Rule 1.451, the term "communication equipment" means a conference telephone or other electronic device that permits all those appearing or participating to hear and speak to each other simultaneously and permits all conversations of all parties to be audible to all persons present. Contemporaneous video communications equipment must make the witness visible to all participants during the testimony. For testimony by any of the foregoing means, there must be appropriate safeguards for the court to maintain sufficient control over the equipment and the transmission of the testimony so the court may stop the communication to accommodate objection or prevent prejudice. <a href="http://floridacivpro.com/rules/1-451-taking-testimony/" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.451(c)</a>.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://floridacivpro.com/rules/1-451-taking-testimony/" target="_blank">Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.451</a> does not relax the traditional "notary requirement" for telephonic or video testimony. Testimony may be taken over the phone or by video only if a notary public or other person authorized to administer oaths in the witness’s jurisdiction is present with the witness and administers the oath consistent with the laws of the jurisdiction.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
According to the committee notes for <a href="http://floridacivpro.com/rules/1-451-taking-testimony/" target="_blank">Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.451</a>, in determining whether good cause exists, the trial court may consider the following factors:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<ul>
<li>The type and stage of proceeding, </li>
<li>The presence or absence of constitutionally protected rights, </li>
<li>The importance of the testimony to the resolution of the case, </li>
<li>The amount in controversy in the case, </li>
<li>The relative cost or inconvenience of requiring the presence of the witness in court, </li>
<li>The ability of counsel to use necessary exhibits or demonstrative aids, </li>
<li>The limitations (if any) placed on the opportunity for opposing counsel and the finder of fact to observe the witness’s demeanor;</li>
<li>The potential for unfair surprise;</li>
<li>The witness’s affiliation with one or more parties, and </li>
<li>Any other factors the court reasonably deems material to weighing the justification the requesting party has offered in support of the request to allow a witness to testify by communications equipment against the potential for prejudice to the objecting party. </li>
</ul>
<div>
If the factors weigh against audio testimony, the court should consider the cost and availability of contemporaneous video testimony as an alternative to permitting audio testimony. In other words, with the advance of technology, video is widely available and may be a preferable medium for permitting testimony.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Notably, the <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBResources.nsf/0/416879C4A88CBF0485256B29004BFAF8/$FILE/311%20Family%20Law.pdf?OpenElement" target="_blank">Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure</a> do not presently include a counterpart to Rule 1.451. In other words, the Family Law Rules do not provide the same discretion allowed in civil cases. This may cause confusion among family law parties, practitioners, and judges. While telephonic and video testimony will presumably become more common in civil cases, these advances in technology were not initially adopted by the <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/DIVEXE/BD/cmstanding.nsf/WCommitteesDetail/8E9816A4C1043E9085257623006B54A2?OpenDocument" target="_blank">Family Law Rules Committee</a>. The Family Law Rules committee acknowledged in its <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/cmdocs/cm222.nsf/WDOCS/C0662F6A0558966685257C84006A19A5" target="_blank">January 2014 meeting</a> that this inconsistency between the civil rules and the family rules was likely to create confusion. As a result, the Family Law Rules Committee <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/cmdocs/cm222.nsf/WDOCS/C0662F6A0558966685257C84006A19A5" target="_blank">voted unanimously to send proposed Rule 12.451 of the Family Law Rules of Procedure to the Florida Supreme Court</a>. The proposed rule may be sent to the Florida Supreme Court as an out-of-cycle amendment.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Until Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.451 is adopted, family law cases are still governed by the Rules of Judicial Administration.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Under <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBResources.nsf/0/416879C4A88CBF0485256B29004BFAF8/$FILE/311%20Family%20Law.pdf?OpenElement" target="_blank">Rule 2.530 of the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration</a>, a judge may, upon the court’s own motion or upon the written request of a party, direct that communication equipment be used for a motion hearing, pretrial conference, or a status conference. A judge must give notice to the parties and consider any objections they may have to the use of communication equipment before directing that communication equipment be used. Subject to certain exceptions, the trial judge has discretion when deciding whether to allow a party to appear by phone or video. </div>
<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rule 2.530 mandates that telephonic appearances be allowed under certain circumstances. When the hearing is set for 15 minutes or less and a party gives reasonable notice and makes a written request to appear by phone or video, the judge must grant the request absent a showing of good cause to deny the same. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With respect to testimony at a longer hearing, Rule 2.530 provides that a county or circuit court judge, general magistrate, special magistrate, or hearing officer may allow the testimony to be taken through communication equipment if all parties consent or if permitted by another applicable rule of procedure. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A party seeking to present testimony by phone or video must, prior to the hearing or trial at which the testimony is to be presented, contact all parties to determine whether each party consents to this form of testimony. The party seeking to present the testimony shall move for permission to present testimony through communication equipment, which motion shall set forth good cause as to why the testimony should be allowed in this form. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Testimony may only be taken by phone or video if a notary public or other person authorized to administer oaths in the witness’s jurisdiction is present with the witness and administers the oath consistent with the laws of the jurisdiction. Many practitioners still fail to have a notary present when their witness is appearing via phone or video. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If the testimony to be presented utilizes video conferencing or comparable two-way visual capabilities, the court in its discretion may modify the procedures set forth in this rule to accommodate the technology utilized. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you have questions about presenting your case in family court, please contact an <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/Bio/RichardMockler.asp" target="_blank">experienced Florida family law attorney</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-41332048074376703842014-03-06T09:15:00.000-05:002014-03-06T09:18:42.917-05:00TampaFamilyMediators.com - A Directory of Family Law Mediators in TampaWe developed a new website that serves as a directory of Tampa family law mediators. Many of us tend to mediate with the same proven mediators. But, a scheduling conflict or other issue circumstances may require you to seek an alternative. Provide this link to your staff or opposing counsel to help select a qualified mediator who can help resolve your case.<br />
<br />
<br />
If you mediate cases in Tampa and you would like to appear on the site (no charge), please don't hesitate to contact me.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://tampafamilymediators.com/">TampaFamilyMediators.com</a>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-60921728222496691242014-03-04T10:44:00.001-05:002014-03-04T10:45:32.242-05:00Can I Get My Family's Diamond Engagement Ring Back in My Divorce?<div style="text-align: justify;">
Divorce clients often ask whether an engagement ring is considered a marital asset in subject to equitable distribution. In the case of short-term marriages, some Husbands will even inquire whether the ring will be returned to them. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Under Florida law, when the parties become married, the Husband no longer has any right to seek a return of the engagement ring. Nor is the ring marital property to be included in the equitable distribution scheme. In short, the ring is simply a premarital gift that is owned solely by the Wife. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=melvik+v.+melvik&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=18057280776411657723&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>See Melvik v. Melvik,</i> 669 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=greenberg+v.+greenberg&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=9531532497948174788&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>Greenberg v. Greenberg</i>, 698 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Most clients accept that the law allows the Wife to keep her engagement ring. The issue is more complex where the ring is a "family heirloom" that previously belonged to a member of the Husband's family. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In one case, the Husband asked the Judge to order that the "heirloom" ring be returned to him. The Court did so, ordering that the ring would be passed on to one of the parties' children. Florida's Second District Court of Appeal reversed this "Solomonic" decision, reasoning that there is no special consideration for a ring that is a family heirloom. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=randall+ring&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=8854033368721264563&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>See Randall v. Randall</i>, 56 So. 3d 817, 818-819 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=randall+ring&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=8854033368721264563&scilh=0" target="_blank">Randall</a></i>, there was no reference to any agreement requiring the Wife to return the ring in the event of a divorce. If the parties reached any agreement, the Husband may have a civil claim to recover the ring. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you have questions about your rights in a dissolution of marriage case, contact an experienced <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/" target="_blank">Tampa family law attorney</a>.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-21271213050982297092013-10-14T00:36:00.003-04:002014-05-02T11:10:40.489-04:00International Parental Kidnapping and Child Abduction: Deterrence and Prevention under Florida Law<div style="text-align: justify;">
Benjamin Franklin taught us that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." This idiom rings particularly true in the context of parental kidnapping and abductions.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We recently blogged about the <a href="http://familylawrights.blogspot.com/2013/10/International-Parental-Kidnapping-and-Child-Abduction-Federal.html" target="_blank">deterrence and prevention of parental kidnapping and abduction under federal and international law</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Florida parents and family law attorneys should also know about remedies that are available under state law.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you have a parenting plan, time-sharing schedule, or custody order in place, and you have evidence that there is a risk the other parent may violate the order by removing the child from Florida, taking the child outside the United States, or by concealing the whereabouts of the child, <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank">section 61.45, Florida Statutes</a>, allows a court to enter an injunction to protect the child.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Under <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank">section 61.45</a>, the court is broadly empowered to take steps designed to prevent and deter child abduction and international kidnapping.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
First, the court may order that a parent may not remove the child from Florida without the notarized written permission of both parents or further court order. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.45(1)(a)</a>. This provides civil and criminal contempt as remedies if the parent removes the child from the state. An order granting this relief may also provide a basis for a child pickup order in a foreign state.</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Second, the court may prohibit a parent from removing the child from this country without the notarized written permission of both parents or further court order. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.45(1)(b)</a>. If the court places limits on the parent's ability to remove the child from the United States, a certified copy of the order should be sent by the parent who requested the restriction to the Passport Services Office of the United States Department of State requesting that they not issue a passport to the child without their signature or further court order. The Department of State operates the <a href="http://travel.state.gov/abduction/prevention/passportissuance/passportissuance_554.html" target="_blank">Children's Passport Issuance Alert Program</a>, which alerts parents if anyone applies for a passport for a minor child registered in the Department's Passport Lookout System. This program provides parents advance warning if someone is planning international travel with the minor child. A parent can register any child that is a U.S. Citizen by completing an <a href="http://travel.state.gov/pdf/CPIAP_Entry_Form_DS-3077.pdf" target="_blank">entry request form</a>.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Third, the court may take a more narrowly tailored approach to limiting a parent's international travel. Specifically, the court may prohibit a parent from taking the child to a country that has not ratified or acceded to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.45(1)(c)</a>.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, the court may require the at-risk parent to surrender to the court or the petitioner’s attorney any United States or foreign passport issued in the child’s name, including a passport issued in the name of both the parent and the child. A parent may also be enjoined from applying on behalf of the child for a new or replacement passport or visa. Additionally, the Court may require that a party post bond or other security in an amount sufficient to serve as a financial deterrent to abduction, the proceeds of which may be used to pay the reasonable expenses of recovery of the child, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, if the child is abducted. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.45(1)(d)</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If the court imposes one of the foregoing limitations on the parent, the court may also place additional travel restrictions requiring a party to provide a travel itinerary for the child, a list of physical addresses and telephone numbers at which the child can be reached at specified times, and advance copies of all travel documents.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The court is also expressly permitted to prohibit a parent from removing the child from school or a child care or similar facility or even approaching the child at any location other than a site designated for supervised visitation.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As a prerequisite to exercising any time-sharing with the child, the Court may require the at-risk parent to provide the following:</div>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify;">An authenticated copy of the order detailing passport and travel restrictions for the child to the Office of Children’s Issues within the Bureau of Consular Affairs of the United States Department of State and the relevant foreign consulate or embassy.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Proof to the court that the respondent has provided the required information.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">An acknowledgment to the court in a record from the relevant foreign consulate or embassy that no passport application has been made, or passport issued, on behalf of the child.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Proof to the petitioner and court of registration with the United States embassy or other United States diplomatic presence in the destination country and with the destination country’s central authority for the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, if that convention is in effect between this country and the destination country, unless one of the parties objects.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">A written waiver under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, with respect to any document, application, or other information pertaining to the child or the respondent authorizing its disclosure to the court.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">A written waiver with respect to any document, application, or other information pertaining to the child or the respondent in records held by the United States Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services authorizing its disclosure to the court.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Upon the court’s request, a requirement that the respondent obtain an order from the relevant foreign country containing terms identical to the child custody determination issued in this country.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Upon the court’s request, a requirement that the respondent be entered in the Prevent Departure Program of the United States Department of State or a similar federal program designed to prevent unauthorized departures to foreign countries.</li>
</ol>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.45(3)(d)</a>.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Court may also order supervised visitation with the child to prevent child abduction or parental kidnapping. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.45(3)(e)</a>. This visitation may remain in effect until the court finds that supervision is no longer necessary and require the at-risk parent to pay the costs of supervision. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.45(3)(e)</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In assessing the need for a bond or other security, the court may consider any reasonable factor bearing upon the risk that a party may violate a parenting plan by removing a child from this state or country or by concealing the whereabouts of a child. Among other things, the court may consider the following:</div>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Whether a party previously removed a child from Florida or another state in violation of a parenting plan, or whether a court had found that a party has threatened to take a child out of Florida or another state in violation of a parenting plan. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Whether the party has strong financial, family, and community ties to Florida or to other states or countries, including whether the party or child is a citizen of another country. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Whether the party has engaged in activities that suggest plans to leave Florida, such as quitting a job, selling a residence, terminating a lease, closing bank accounts, liquidating assets, applying for a passport or visa, or obtaining travel documents for the respondent or the child. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Whether the party has a criminal record or a history of domestic violence as either a victim or perpetrator, child abuse or child neglect evidenced by criminal history. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Whether the at-risk party is likely to take the child to a country that is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and does not provide for the extradition of an abducting parent or for the return of an abducted child. Even if a country has ratified the Hague Convention, the court may still inquire whether the country has adequate mechanisms for enforcement of a U.S. custody order, is safe, and/or has laws that would protect the other parent's relationship with the child, is a sponsor of terrorism. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Whether the at-risk party is undergoing a change in immigration or citizenship status that would adversely affect the respondent’s ability to remain in this country legally, has had an application for United States citizenship denied, or has forged or presented misleading or false evidence on government forms or supporting documents to obtain or attempt to obtain a passport, a visa, travel documents, a social security card, a driver’s license, or other government-issued identification card or has made a misrepresentation to the United States government. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Whether the at-risk party has been diagnosed with a mental health disorder that the court considers relevant to the risk of abduction.</li>
</ol>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.45(4)(a-m)</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If the at-risk parent violates the parenting plan by removing a child from this state or country or by concealing the whereabouts of a child, the court may order the bond or other security forfeited in whole or in part. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.45.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.45(7)(a)</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Significantly, section 61.45 does not apply to a parent is determined by the court to be a victim of an act of domestic violence or provides the court with reasonable cause to believe that he or she is about to become the victim of an act of domestic violence. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In addition to the foregoing remedies under Florida law, a parent whose child is at risk of international kidnapping or child abduction should be familiar with the <a href="http://familylawrights.blogspot.com/2013/10/International-Parental-Kidnapping-and-Child-Abduction-Federal.html" target="_blank">applicable federal and international deterrents, laws, and remedies</a>. A parent concerned about child abduction should also consult an experienced <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/Bio/RichardMockler.asp" target="_blank">child custody attorney</a>.</div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-58729533390365919102013-10-13T23:06:00.000-04:002014-02-23T22:35:46.496-05:00International Parental Kidnapping and Child Abduction: Deterrence and Prevention under Federal and International Law<div style="text-align: justify;">
If your child is at risk of being abducted to a foreign country, you need to be vigilant about your rights, who to call, and what to do if an abduction occurs or is about to occur.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are a number of federal laws and programs designed to prevent the wrongful removal of children from the United States. The U.S. Department of State provides a summary of federal and international prevention tools on its <a href="http://travel.state.gov/abduction/prevention/prevention/prevention_2873.html" target="_blank">website</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Department of State operates the <a href="http://travel.state.gov/abduction/prevention/passportissuance/passportissuance_554.html" target="_blank">Children's Passport Issuance Alert Program</a>, which alerts parents if anyone applies for a passport for a minor child registered in the Department's Passport Lookout System. This program provides parents advance warning if someone is planning international travel with the minor child. A parent can register any child that is a U.S. Citizen by completing an <a href="http://travel.state.gov/pdf/CPIAP_Entry_Form_DS-3077.pdf" target="_blank">entry request form</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Department of State also operates an <a href="http://travel.state.gov/abduction/emergencies/emergencies_3845.html" target="_blank">Emergency Hotline</a> for abductions that are in progress where the child is being abducted by a family member and the child is not yet abroad.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If your child has already been removed from the country, <a href="http://travel.state.gov/abduction/solutions/solutions_3848.html" target="_blank">Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs</a> can open an <a href="http://travel.state.gov/abduction/solutions/opencase/opencase_3849.html" target="_blank">International Parental Child Abduction Case</a>. The Bureau of Consular Affairs may also be able to use its resources to assist you in <a href="http://travel.state.gov/abduction/solutions/locatechildren/locatechildren_3850.html" target="_blank">locating your child</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If your child has already been removed from the United States, you may be able to seek relief under international law. Currently, there are <a href="http://www.travel.state.gov/abduction/resources/congressreport/congressreport_1487.html" target="_blank">72 signatories</a> to the <a href="http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=conventions.text&cid=24" target="_blank">Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction</a>. If your child is under 16 years of age and abducted to a country that is a signatory to the Hague Convention, you may be able to obtain a return order under the Convention. The Hague Conference on Privation International Law publishes an <a href="http://www.hcch.net/upload/outline28e.pdf" target="_blank">outline summarizing the child abduction aspects of the Hague Convention</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If your child is abducted to a country that is not a signatory to the Hague Convention, you may be able to <a href="http://travel.state.gov/abduction/solutions/solutions_3855.html" target="_blank">use that foreign country's legal system to regain custody of your child</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Department of State operates an <a href="http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/AttorneyNetworkEnrollmentForm411.pdf" target="_blank">Attorney Network</a>, which consists of attorneys with Hague Convention return and access cases. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lastly, you can ask authorities to file <a href="http://travel.state.gov/abduction/solutions/criminal/criminal_3856.html" target="_blank">criminal charges</a> against the parent who abducted your child. The <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1204" target="_blank">International Parental Kidnapping Act of 1993</a> makes it a federal crime to remove a child from the United States or retain a child outside the United States with the intent of obstructing the lawful exercise of parental rights. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you need more information about actions to take to prevent or respond to an international child abduction, The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the American Bar Association have made the following publication available: <a href="http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/publications/NC75.pdf" target="_blank">Family Abduction: Prevention and Response</a>. The Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention also publishes <a href="https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/215476.pdf" target="_blank">A Family Resource Guide on International Parental Kidnapping</a>. Both of these publications are full of helpful information.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you are in Florida, you should be aware of <a href="http://familylawrights.blogspot.com/2013/10/International-Parental-Kidnapping-and-Child-Abduction-Florida.html" target="_blank">remedies under Florida law to deter the risk of international child abduction or parental kidnapping</a>. You should also consult an experienced <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Child-Custody.asp" target="_blank">Florida child custody attorney</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comTampa, FL, USA27.950575 -82.45717760000002327.5019215 -83.102624600000027 28.3992285 -81.811730600000018tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-85534649296150091572013-05-15T09:58:00.001-04:002014-02-23T22:36:00.041-05:00Debtor's Prison: Is an Award of Florida Family Law Attorneys' Fees Enforceable by Contempt?<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is much confusion among parties in Florida family law cases - and certain practicing attorneys - regarding which obligations are enforceable by the court's contempt powers.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of the more common questions that arises is whether a client "has to pay" an award of attorneys' fees ordered by the court. Generally speaking, no one wants to pay "the enemy."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Long ago, our society determined that we should not have "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debtors'_prison" target="_blank">debtors' prisons</a>." In other words, a free person cannot be threatened with imprisonment for failure to pay his or her debts.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This right is expressly protected by <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?submenu=3#A1S11" target="_blank">Article I, Section 11 of the Florida Constitution</a>. But, the courts have fashioned an exception to that rule for family support obligations, such as child support and alimony.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The courts have reasoned that the obligation to pay spousal or child support is a personal duty owed to both the former spouse or child and to society rather than a debt within the meaning of article I, section 11. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8960653653915045945&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>See Gibson v. Bennett</i>, 561 So. 2d 565, 570 (Fla. 1990)</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"The courts have a duty to provide an effective, realistic means for enforcing a support order, or the parent or former spouse for all practical purposes becomes immune from an order for support." <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8960653653915045945&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Gibson</i>, 561 So. 2d at 570</a>. This duty includes enforcement of a judgment through contempt because "a remedy at law that is ineffective in practice is not an adequate remedy." <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8960653653915045945&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank">Id</a></i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The use of contempt in a family law case is premised on the assumed necessity for the special protection and enforcement of rights growing out of the family relationship. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=fishman+contempt+attorney+fees&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=6786015745956471869&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>See Fishman v. Fishman</i>, 656 So. 2d 1250, 1252 (Fla. 1995)</a>. This rule has been extended to include the enforcement of payments of attorney's fees related to family law proceedings. <i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=fishman+contempt+attorney+fees&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=6786015745956471869&scilh=0" target="_blank">Id</a></i>. Attorneys' fees in family law cases are considered a form of support, as the expense of litigating matters pertaining to family obligations should be borne by the family in the same manner as other expenses.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Although the Court may employ its contempt powers to enforce payment of an attorney's fee award, that power is not without limits. Civil contempt is appropriate only if the party to be held in contempt has the present ability to comply with the court's order and thereby avoid incarceration or other sanctions. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=471+So.+2d+1274&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=4128442626226775768&scilh=0" target="_blank"><i>See Bowen v. Bowen</i>, 471 So. 2d 1274, 1278 (Fla. 1985)</a>.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-34273228887390899972013-05-14T10:46:00.000-04:002014-02-23T22:36:11.513-05:00Waste and Dissipation Claims: Is There a Statute of Limitations? <div style="text-align: justify;">
In a divorce proceeding, clients often ask how far back the Court will look when assessing whether a party engaged in waste or dissipation of marital assets.
Equitable distribution of marital assets is governed by <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.075.html">section 61.075, Florida Statutes</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Under section 61.075, the court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution based on all relevant factors. Section 61.075(1)(i) requires trial courts to consider intentional dissipation that occurs up to two (2) years prior to filing the petition.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Dissipation occurs where one spouse uses marital funds for his or her own benefit and for a purpose unrelated to the marriage at a time when the marriage is undergoing an irreconcilable breakdown. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=973+So.+2d+580&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&case=8039328844552765295&scilh=0"><i>See Roth v. Roth</i>, 973 So. 2d 580, 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)</a> (citing <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16970935355535844953&q=See+Romano+v.+Romano,+632+So.+2d+207,+210+(Fla.+4th+DCA+1994)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10"><i> Romano v. Romano</i>, 632 So. 2d 207, 210 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)</a>).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Too often, a divorce attorney will advise clients that you can only prove waste or dissipation that occurred with the past two (2) years.
The statute, however, is silent as to intentional waste or dissipation that may have occurred more remotely in time. If your spouse intentionally dissipated marital assets three years prior to the filing date, is there any recourse?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Courts have held that the legislature did not intend to preclude consideration of waste or dissipation beyond two years. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4829778834445781590&q=year+waste+marital+asset&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10"><i>See, e.g., Beers v. Beers</i>, 724 So. 2d 109, 114-15 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6001764440470862096&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&kqfp=16321725920492740423&kql=103&kqpfp=7331166526858732643#kq" style="font-style: italic;">Amos v. Amos</a><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6001764440470862096&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&kqfp=16321725920492740423&kql=103&kqpfp=7331166526858732643#kq">, 99 So. 3d 979 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)</a>. Intentional dissipation of marital assets occurring more than two years prior to filing a petition for dissolution may, in some instances, be a factor necessary to do equity and justice between the parties. Clearly, a party should not be able to transfer significant assets outside the marital estate, wait two years, and then file for divorce. Courts have considered waste and dissipation beyond two years under the catchall provision of section 61.075(1)(j). <i>Id</i>. But, the Court has great discretion in deciding whether to consider any evidence of waste or dissipation that occurred more years prior to the filing date. </div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-57731739269911694142013-02-18T22:59:00.001-05:002014-02-23T22:48:01.933-05:00Be Prepared: Get a Prenup Before Saying "I Do"<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Most people like to think that they are prepared for the obstacles that they will face in life. Like the Boy Scout motto, Americans like to “be prepared.”</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
And, just in case we are asleep at the wheel, there are people constantly reminding us every step of the way that we should protect ourselves. It starts early. For example, a parent might remind us to bring an umbrella – because it might rain. As we get older, we learn to buy car insurance because we might have an accident. People buy alarm systems to detect and deter intruders. Working professionals buy insurance to protect against the unlikely risk of disability. Most people buy life insurance to hedge against the risk that they might die. And, if you have a mortgage, homeowner’s insurance is mandatory to protect against risks such as fire and wind.</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Americans also like contracts. Remember the license agreements that you had to accept just to install a game on your computer? When you went off to college, your first credit card certainly came with a cardholder agreement. If you wanted to rent an apartment, that definitely required a lease. Did you want cell phone service? You needed a contract. If you go to work at a business, your employer might ask you to sign non-compete agreement.</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But, for some strange reason, people enter into marriage with no contract or agreement whatsoever. They just trust each other. Remarkably, these are the same individuals who buy the life insurance and disability insurance, even though a 30-year-old man faces a 0.1% chance of dying before age 31 and less than 5% of wage earners are classified as “disabled.” Yet, they turn a blind eye to the fact that more than 50% of marriages result in divorce.</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Prenuptial-Post-Nuptial-Agreements.asp" target="_blank">prenuptial agreement</a> or “<a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Prenuptial-Post-Nuptial-Agreements.asp" target="_blank">prenup</a>” can protect you against losses that might result from your divorce. If you don’t have a prenuptial agreement, what do you stand to lose? You can start with giving away roughly half of the net worth that you worked so hard to accumulate during the marriage. And, to the extent you earned them during the marriage, you will likely have to divide your pension, retirement benefits, and/or retirement accounts. You may also have the privilege of paying a large percentage of your monthly salary to your “ex” as alimony. And, without a prenup, you could be forced to pay off half of your ex’s bad debt. You could even be saddled with half of your “ex’s” student loans. </div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But, there is rarely someone in your corner to remind you about getting a prenup. Until recently, that is. Since the Great Recession, 3 out of 4 family law attorneys report that prenups are on the rise. This may be due to the devastating impact of the financial collapse, which has made people questions how much they can earn in the future and makes them want to keep what they have earned. </div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Recently, I have had several parents call my office about prenups for the children. One retired military officer wanted a prenup for his son, who was about to start flight school. The father was concerned that his son might lose half of his hard-earned military retirement pay if the marriage didn’t last a lifetime. A mother recently called me because she had refused to pay for the wedding unless the couple signed a prenuptial agreement. And, an accountant paying lifetime alimony called me last year in hopes that a prenup might avoid the same fate for his son.</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In certain circumstances, a prenuptial agreement can make a marriage more likely to last. A spouse is more likely to return to work or keep working if that spouse knows he or she cannot rely on alimony in the event that the marriage breaks down. And, in some cases, a spouse may be less likely to leave or look around if he or she knows that they will not be able to use the divorce to raid the other party’s retirement pay, pension, assets, and income.</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Fortunately, despite what you might have heard, prenuptial agreements are enforceable under Florida law. In 2007, the Florida Legislature passed the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.079.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.079(4)(a)</a>. Under the Act, a premarital agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties. <i>Id</i>. The Act allows Parties to negotiate and agree upon the following issues: (i) the parties’ rights and obligations concerning any assets and liabilities; (ii) the right to buy, sell, use, transfer, or dispose of property; (iii) the distribution of property upon separation, dissolution, death, or other event; (iv) the right to alimony; (v) the making of a will or trust; and (vi) the disposition of life insurance proceeds. <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.079.html" target="_blank"><i>See </i>Fla. Stat. § 61.079(4)(a)</a>. And, one Florida court specifically held that a prenup may be enforceable to protect a pension and military retirement pay. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17927358940569378300&hl=en&as_sdt=2,10" target="_blank"><i>See Gordon v. Gordon</i>, 25 So. 3d 615, 617-18 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)</a>.<br />
<br />
Florida courts have held that the parties do not need to attorneys for a prenuptial agreement to be enforceable.<i> <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16873217888027469401&hl=en&as_sdt=2,10" target="_blank">See Casto v. Casto</a></i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16873217888027469401&hl=en&as_sdt=2,10" target="_blank">, 508 So. 2d 330, 334-35 (Fla. 1987)</a>. The Florida Supreme court has also held, however, that a prenuptial agreement may not be enforceable if the agreement was procured by as a result of fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, misrepresentation, or overreaching. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16873217888027469401&hl=en&as_sdt=2,10" target="_blank"><i>See Casto</i>, 508 So. 2d at 333</a>. Additionally, a prenup may be set aside if there is a showing that the agreement is unreasonable on its face for failure to provide adequately for the challenging spouse coupled with a lack of adequate financial disclosure. <i>Id</i>. So, even though a lawyer is not absolutely necessary, an agreement is far more likely to be upheld with the assistance of counsel. </div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If you have questions about <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Prenuptial-Post-Nuptial-Agreements.asp" target="_blank">prenuptial agreements</a>, please <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/CM/Custom/Contact.asp" target="_blank">contact us</a> to consult an <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/Bio/RichardMockler.asp" target="_blank">experienced Tampa divorce and family law attorney</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-45881262072022093602013-02-13T10:53:00.000-05:002014-02-23T22:38:16.561-05:00Life Insurance to Secure Alimony and Child Support<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Clients often ask about whether the Court will require a party to procure life insurance to secure their <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Spousal-SupportAlimony.asp" target="_blank">alimony</a> or <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/ChildSupport.asp" target="_blank">child support</a> obligation. Like many legal questions, the answer is "it depends."</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
</div>
<div style="position: relative;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Courts do have the authority to order a party to provide term life insurance to secure his or her child support and alimony payments. <i>See</i> Fla. Stat. §§ <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.08.html" target="_blank">61.08(3)</a>, <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.13.html" target="_blank">61.13(1)(c)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18211565913445570931&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Sobelman v. Sobelman,</i> 541 So. 2d 1153, 1154 (Fla. 1989)</a>. </span></div>
</div>
<div style="position: relative;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
</div>
<div style="position: relative;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">When determining whether life insurance is appropriate, the court will consider the need for the insurance, the cost and availability of the insurance, and the financial impact upon the obligor. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1960607864328016725&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>See Child v. Child</i>, 34 So. 3d 159 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2875310414986189225&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Plichta v. Plichta,</i> 899 So. 2d 1283, 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)</a>. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16803435417549301599&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>See also Byers v. Byers,</i> 910 So. 2d 336, 346 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)</a>. </span></div>
</div>
<div style="position: relative;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
</div>
<div style="position: relative;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Florida courts have held, however, that certain "special circumstances" must be present to require a payor to purchase life insurance on his or her alimony or child support obligation. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1960607864328016725&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>See Child v. Child</i>, 34 So. 3d 159 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9679747255100416715&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Massam v. Massam,</i> 993 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2982121899359246978&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Melo v. Melo,</i> 864 So.2d 1268 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5776681759799754418&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Frechter v. Frechter,</i> 548 So.2d 712 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)</a>. </span></div>
</div>
<div style="position: relative;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
</div>
<div style="position: relative;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">But, the "special circumstances" are not particularly difficult to prove. The special circumstances may be present where the former spouse would face difficult financial circumstances if the support payments were to cease upon the death of the obligor. The circumstances may be present where the surviving party has limited earning capacity or children to support. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1960607864328016725&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>See, e.g., Child v. Child</i>, 34 So. 3d 159 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18093376310493848394&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Kotlarz v. Kotlarz,</i> 21 So. 3d 892, 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10724581090428876243&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Richardson v. Richardson,</i> 900 So.2d 656, 661 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9679747255100416715&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Massam v. Massam,</i> 993 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11426891925375494591&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Davidson v. Davidson,</i> 882 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)</a>.</span></div>
</div>
<div style="position: relative;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
</div>
<div style="position: relative;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">If the special circumstances are present, the Party requesting the life insurance must establish that the amount of insurance sought is available at an affordable cost. <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9679747255100416715&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>See Massam,</i> 993 So. 2d at 1022</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15350563642747625411&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Rubinstein v. Rubinstein,</i> 866 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)</a>; <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16212470557435299776&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Zimmerman v. Zimmerman,</i> 755 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)</a>; and <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6544549792412360778&q=child+v.+child&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10" target="_blank"><i>Schere v. Schere,</i> 645 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)</a>. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">If you have questions about </span><a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Spousal-SupportAlimony.asp" style="font-family: inherit;" target="_blank">alimony</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> or </span><a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/ChildSupport.asp" style="font-family: inherit;" target="_blank">child support</a><span style="font-family: inherit;">, please </span><a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/CM/Custom/Contact.asp" style="font-family: inherit;" target="_blank">contact us</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> to consult an </span><a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/Bio/RichardMockler.asp" style="font-family: inherit;" target="_blank">experienced Tampa divorce and family law attorney</a><span style="font-family: inherit;">.</span></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17330871927898062619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-17273556841873304492011-07-18T15:07:00.000-04:002013-02-20T10:00:03.191-05:00Prenuptial Agreements and Estate Planning Considerations: ‘Till Death Do Us Part<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Nearly 80,000 Florida residents file for <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/">divorce</a> each year.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And, Florida has the nation’s highest percentage of residents over the age of 65.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Many people enter into a second marriage with significant assets and adult children.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Accordingly, it is often important to consult an <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/">experienced Florida family law attorney</a> for a <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Prenuptial-Post-Nuptial-Agreements.asp">prenuptial agreement</a> that addresses address both marital and estate planning issues.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
Florida adopted the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act (the “UPAA”), which expressly provides that parties may reach a binding contract on the following issues:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(i) the parties’ rights and obligations concerning any assets and liabilities; (ii) the right to buy, sell, use, transfer, or dispose of property; (iii) the distribution of property upon separation, dissolution, death, or other event; (iv) the right to alimony; (v) the making of a will or trust; and (vi) the disposition of life insurance proceeds.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.079.html">See Fla. Stat. § 61.079(4)(a)</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
It is imperative to understand the estate and probate rights that may be waived by a spouse.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.702.html">See Fla. Stat. § 732.702</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For example, a<span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"> surviving spouse normally has the right to receive an “elective share” of the deceased spouse’s estate (under current law, 30% of the elective estate as defined in Chapter 732, Part II, Florida Statutes).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
<span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
<span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">A surviving spouse also has special rights to homestead real property.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A decedent may not freely devise homestead real property upon death if survived by a spouse or minor child.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.4015.html"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">See</i> Fla. Stat. § 732.4015</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The surviving spouse is entitled to a life estate in the property or, upon election, an undivided one-half interest.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">See</i> Fla. Stat. §§ <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.401.html">732.401</a> and <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.4015.html">732.4015</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The property is exempt from any claims by the decedent’s creditors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">See</i> Art. X, Sec. 4, Fla. Const.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
<span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Additionally, if a spouse dies intestate (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">i</i>.<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">e</i>., without a will), a surviving spouse is entitled to a specific share of the estate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.102.html"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">See</i> Fla. Stat. § 732.102</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">If a person marries after making a will, the surviving spouse is entitled to receive an intestate share of the estate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.301.html">See Fla. Stat. § 732.301</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">A surviving spouse is also entitled to receive up to $20,000 in certain exempt property.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.402.html">See Fla. Stat. § 732.402</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">A surviving spouse is separately entitled to receive up to $18,000 in “family allowance” for support during the administration of an estate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.403.html"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">See</i> Fla. Stat. § 732.403</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Finally, a surviving spouse has preference in appointment to serve as personal representative of a decedent’s intestate estate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
<span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br />
</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: .5in;">
<span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">All of these rights may be waived in a <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Prenuptial-Post-Nuptial-Agreements.asp">prenuptial agreement</a></span>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">See</i>, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">e</i>.<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">g</i>., Fla. Stat. §§ <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.701.html">732.701</a> and <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.702.html">732.702</a> (to the extent the prenuptial agreement affects estate and probate rights, it must satisfy all other applicable formalities).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The<span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"> <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Prenuptial-Post-Nuptial-Agreements.asp">prenuptial agreement</a>, however, may include language requiring the parties to make a will or trust, to give a devise, or not to revoke a will or devise.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">See</i> Fla. Stat. §§ <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.079.html">61.079(4)(a)</a> and <a href="http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0732/Sections/0732.702.html">732.702</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">A practitioner must be prepared to advise clients on any rights that are being waived and avenues to protect the client’s interests.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-86199705101017529072010-05-23T23:39:00.001-04:002014-02-23T22:38:36.732-05:00Do I have to pay child support if I receive disability payments from the government?<div style="text-align: justify;">
One common question is whether a parent has to pay child support if the children are receiving social security payments as a result of the parent's disability.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The short answer is that social security payments do not negate the obligation to pay child support. A disabled parent, however, does receive credit for the social security paid for the benefit of the children. In some cases, especially where the disabled parent has no other income, these payments may actually exceed the support obligation. The fact of the matter is that, to make any determination, you should still have a <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/">Florida family law attorney</a> or other qualified person apply the <a href="http://www.mocklerlaw.com/Fla._Stat._61_Q1ZL.html">Florida child support guidelines</a>, properly taking into account any social security benefits paid to the children.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Under the Florida child support guidelines, social security is treated as income for purposes of calculating the parents' child support obligation. Specifically, under <a href="http://www.mocklerlaw.com/Fla._Stat._61_Q1ZL.html">section 61.30(2)(a)(8)</a>, the social security benefits are treated as income to the disabled parent. The disabled parent, however, also receives credit for paying support equal to the amount of the social security received on behalf of the children. In other words, the social security funds are hypothetically earned by the disabled parent and paid by that parent to the children.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This rule was established by the First District Court of Appeals in <i><a href="http://www.blogger.com/goog_1814085999">Williams v. Williams</a></i><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12709682260363624214&q=560+So.2d+308+&hl=en&as_sdt=40004">, 560 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)</a>. In <i>Williams</i>, the trial court failed to credit a disabled father for social security payments received by the mother on behalf of their three children. The court ordered that, in addition to the disability funds the mother received directly, the father also had to pay child support out of his own disability payments. As a result, after satisfying his child support obligations, the father had no money from which to live. The First District found that the court erred when calculating the child support guideline amount by failing properly to account for the social security payments received by the children.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In most cases, the social security payments will exceed the disabled parent's obligation to pay support. This is especially true where the disabled parent has no other material income.</div>
Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-70978381947556326552010-05-23T18:53:00.000-04:002014-02-23T22:39:03.215-05:00Is Per Diem Properly Included in Income for Purposes of Calculating Florida Child Support?<div style="text-align: justify;">
As a <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/">Tampa family law attorney</a>, I handle a large number of <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Military-Divorce.asp">military divorces</a>. These cases present a number of unique issues. One of the issues that often arises is how to account for military allowances and benefits from a family law perspective. Service members frequently do not understand that, for purposes of calculating child support, income is defined much more broadly than taxable income under the Internal Revenue Code. As any <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Military-Divorce.asp">military divorce attorney</a> will tell you, clients in the armed forces are often disappointed to learn that, while certain compensation is left off the tax return, those benefits are usually income under the <a href="http://mocklerlaw.com/Fla._Stat._61_Q1ZL.html">Florida child support guidelines</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Not all payments and benefits received, however, constitute income. Many military service members and civilian employees receive an allowance for travel and other expenses. This pay is commonly referred to as a <i>per diem</i> allowance. <i>Per diem</i> is a Latin term, which literally means "per day." The term most often refers to the amount of money the company, government, or other organization will pay each day to cover living and travel expenses incurred in connection with work.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of our recent <a href="http://www.squidoo.com/militarydivorceattorney">military divorce</a> clients involved a reservist that planned to spend an entire year on a security detail in the Middle East. As part of the contract, the client was scheduled to receive a <i>per diem</i> for certain expenses. An obvious issue in the client's divorce was whether the <i>per diem</i> would be included in income for purposes of calculating the client's Florida child support obligation.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Pursuant to <a href="http://mocklerlaw.com/Fla._Stat._61_Q1ZL.html">section 61.30(2)(a)(13)</a>, Florida Statutes, reimbursed expenses, including per diem allowances, may be included in income for purposes of calculating child support. These payments, however, are only included to the extent that the payment reduces the recipient's living expenses.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Very few appellate decisions help <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/">family law attorneys</a> interpret this standard. Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal provided some insight in <a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3566506527693351583&q=lauro+lauro&hl=en&as_sdt=40004"><i>Lauro v. Lauro</i>, 757 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)</a>, the husband testified that the <i>per diem</i> he received was insufficient to cover the actual expenses he incurred when he was away from home on business. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The wife could present no evidence to the contrary but argued that, if the husband is paid <i>per diem</i> to cover his meals away from home, he does not have to buy groceries for dinner at home. The court rejected her argument for two reasons. First, the <i>per diem</i> at issue was a flat rate per day which did not necessarily cover the actual expenses incurred by the husband. Second, even if the husband were reimbursed for the exact amount he spent on a meal away from home, any reduction in his living expenses at home because he did not have to buy groceries was <i>de minimus</i>. Trial judges should not be reduced to having to decide how much a spouse, who was reimbursed for a meal while traveling, would have spent on a can of soup or a frozen dinner at home.</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Based on this reasoning, we can expect the <a href="http://www.squidoo.com/tampadivorceattorney">best divorce attorneys</a> to argue that a <i>per diem</i> will not be included in income for purposes of calculating <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/ChildSupport.asp">child support</a> unless the allowance exceeds the actual expense or eliminates a material expense, such as housing, that otherwise would have been incurred.</div>
</div>
Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-91152522669657717392010-04-15T10:27:00.000-04:002010-04-15T10:27:14.203-04:00Larry King Does It AgainLarry King is currently on his eighth marriage. He is also headed for his eighth divorce. Apparently, Wife No. 8 is upset and alleges that Larry is having a sexual relationship with her sister. The Wife is seeking the couples' Beverly Hills Home, alimony, child support, and custody of their two sons. <br />
<br />
Larry is currently 76 years old. How do you explain things to your boys? "Well, Aunt Becky was just really hot in that little skirt." I wonder if a ninth woman will agree to holy matrimony with Larry King.Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-49601971409485201082009-12-28T11:00:00.002-05:002009-12-28T11:00:44.525-05:00Smart Lawyer Gets No Sympathy from the Court<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">A <a href="http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202437278520&src=EMC-Email&et=editorial&bu=Law.com&pt=LAWCOM%20Newswire&cn=NW_20091224&kw=Judge%20Rejects%20Paul%20Weiss%20Partner's%20Bid%20to%20Revisit%20His%20Divorce%20Pact%20After%20Madoff%20Loss">story</a> published by <a href="http://law.com/">Law.com</a> on Christmas Eve really got my attention.<br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">So, when is it fair to revisit the terms of your divorce?<span> </span>That may depend on who you are.<br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;">Yes, a final judgment or decree is supposed to be “final.” But, in family law cases, there are occasions where it is completely appropriate and sometimes even necessary to change the terms of the final judgment or decree.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;">What justifies modifying a final judgment? You obviously don’t want people going back to court every time they realize they left something out of their agreement or want something new. At the same time, courts have to respect that circumstances do change.<span> </span>This is especially true with continuing obligations such as child support, alimony, and visitation.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;">The law is pretty clear that you can revisit alimony, custody, time-sharing, and parental responsibility when there is a substantial change in circumstances. Most states also require that the change is involuntary and unanticipated.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;">But, when is it appropriate to reconsider the <a href="http://www.familylawrights.com/PracticeAreas/Property-Division-Business-Ownership-Valuation.asp">equitable distribution</a> of assets? <span> </span>A high-ranking <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">New York</st1:place></st1:state> real estate attorney at the prestigious<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.paulweiss.com/">Paul Weiss</a><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>law firm recently learned that he would receive no sympathy from the court when his circumstances changed for the worse. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;"><a href="http://www.paulweiss.com/lawyers/detail.aspx?attorney=159">Steven Simkin</a><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>had been married to his wife, Laura Blank, for more than 30 years. They spent the better part of two years fighting over the value of certain real estate investments and Mr. Simkin’s law practice. One item that was not subject to dispute was their account at Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, which reflected a value of $5.4 million. In the divorce, Laura Blank took $2.7 million in cash for her share of the Madoff investments.<span> </span>Presumably for tax and other reasons, Mr. Simkin left most of the money in the Madoff investment fund.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;">As virtually everyone now knows, Bernie Madoff's investment fund was one of the largest<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_L._Madoff_Investment_Securities_LLC">ponzi schemes</a><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>in the history of the world. And, it turns out that Steve Simkin’s <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_L._Madoff_Investment_Securities_LLC">Madoff investments</a><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>were<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/03/18/business/econwatch/entry4873931.shtml">completely worthless</a>. After learning that he paid his wife $2.7 million for her half of a worthless investment, Mr. Simkin asked a <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:state w:st="on">New York</st1:state></st1:place> court to</span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/02/04/2009-02-04_ny_lawyer_contests_divorce_payout_never_.html">set aside</a></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span">the agreement.</span><o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;">On December 24, 2009, the New York Law Journal reported that the court<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202437278520&src=EMC-Email&et=editorial&bu=Law.com&pt=LAWCOM%20Newswire&cn=NW_20091224&kw=Judge%20Rejects%20Paul%20Weiss%20Partner's%20Bid%20to%20Revisit%20His%20Divorce%20Pact%20After%20Madoff%20Loss">denied any relief</a><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>to Mr. Simkin. According to the report, Acting Supreme Court Justice <a href="http://www.robeprobe.com/find_judges_result2.php?judge_id=1504">Saralee Evans</a> held that the Court simply would not revisit the parties’ settlement. The Court reasoned that the account could have been converted to cash, so neither party was mistaken in their marital settlement agreement. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;">But, what the Court apparently failed to consider was that, even if the money had been withdrawn, it still would have been subject to a “<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/25/60minutes/main5339719.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody">clawback suit</a>” by the Trustee for the Madoff Estate. The Trustee can recover withdrawals going back <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/25/60minutes/main5339719_page4.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody">six years</a>.<span> </span>Nevertheless, Mr. Simkin is simply out of luck. First, he lost $5.4 million in the Bernie Madoff fraud. Then, to add insult to injury, he unwittingly gave his wife $2.7 million for her share of the worthless Madoff investments.<span> </span>Of course, there are many stories about people who were <a href="http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1866398,00.html">screwed by Bernie Madoff</a>.<span> </span>But, in this case, the family law judge decided that Mr. Simkin should bear 100% of the loss and his wife should keep the $2.7 million she took for her share of the sham investment.<span> </span><o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;">The Court simply had no sympathy for a man who had represented many of the world’s most sophisticated investors in their<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.paulweiss.com/lawyers/detail.aspx?attorney=159">most important real estate deals</a>.<span> </span>I question whether the Court would have reached the same conclusion had the wife been left with the worthless investments.<span> </span><o:p></o:p></span><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black;">The only good news is that Bernie Madoff will be spending the rest of his life in prison as part of a<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Madoff#cite_note-9270960Minutes-4">150-year sentence</a>.<span> </span>Unfortunately for Mr. Madoff, there are several inmates who apparently have a sense of <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1137496.html">rough justice</a> that is even stronger than the Judge that slammed Steve Simkin.</span><br />
</div>Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-55181076069009514632009-12-23T07:06:00.000-05:002009-12-23T07:06:17.514-05:00AVVO Assigns Superb Rating to Attorney Richard J. Mockler<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">The website AVVO.com has assigned a Superb Rating and a numerical rating of 10.0 to Attorney Richard J. Mockler.<br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><a href="http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/33606-fl-richard-mockler-1267543.html">Avvo Lawyer Rating</a><br />
</div>Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-80781089959348683382009-11-28T20:26:00.004-05:002009-11-29T14:52:03.587-05:00Therapy Brings Happiness<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/psychotherapycanboosthappinessmorethanmoneystudy">Therapy Brings Happiness</a><br />
<br />
A recent study suggests that a single course of therapy can bring more happiness than winning the lottery or getting a $40,000 pay raise. <br />
<br />
Seriously?Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-5567365628126597002009-11-27T22:03:00.000-05:002009-11-27T22:03:16.580-05:00Military Divorce Rate On the Rise<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">According to the Defense Manpower Data Center, the divorce rate for married service members increased by more than 38% from September 2001 to September 2009. <br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">In 2001, the divorce rate for married service members was 2.6%. By 2008, the military divorce rate had increased to 3.4%. For 2009, that rate increased to 3.6%. The rate for military women is an astonishing 7.7%, while the rate for men is 3%.<br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">According to Joe Davis, spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, when a married couple is faced with "eight years of war, preparing for war, being at war, coming home and having to think about going back to war again — and when you have children — it just has a tremendous impact on the family unit."<br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">April Cunningham, a spokeswoman for the department of defense, referred to the increase over last year as "relatively small." According to my math, the overall rate increased by 6% in a single year. If you told me my taxes were going up by 6%, I would not consider that increase "relatively small."<br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Some people criticize that the actual military divorce rate is much higher due to the inaccurate manner in which the defense department counts divorces as the difference each year between the number of married service members.<br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">This would not come as a surprise, since a recent field survey in Iraq showed that nearly 22 percent of young combat soldiers questioned said they planned to get a divorce or separation. This is a 77% increase over 2003, when 12.4% of young combat soldiers said they planned to get a divorce or separation.<br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_military_divorces">Military Divorce</a><br />
</div>Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-78751888344366846762009-11-23T14:55:00.000-05:002009-11-23T14:55:25.402-05:00Social Abandonment - He Refuses to Go to My Social EventsThank God for no-fault divorce states. New York actually still requires a reason justifying the divorce. So much for mere "irreconcilable differences."<br />
<br />
Apparently, "social abandonment" is not sufficient grounds for terminating the marriage. When Novel Davis filed for divorce from her husband, Shepherd, she argued that the divorce should be allowed because he abandoned her - socially. Among other things, Shepherd refused to eat meals with Novel, celebrate holidays together or attend family functions.<br />
<br />
It's a shame, but New York law will require Novel to come up with a better reason before granting her divorce.Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8265074267431759748.post-1202460540434819082009-11-23T10:59:00.000-05:002009-11-23T10:59:55.717-05:00Jon concedes primary custody to KateOkay, so Jon and Kate's divorce will be finalized by the end of the year. <br />
<br />
Jon showed up to an all-day Saturday mediation with a dozen roses as a peace-offering. But, Kate refused to accept them. So, I likely won't advise my clients to use this approach. Although, I do encourage everyone to be nice, especially when you want to reach an agreement regarding your divorce rather than financing a messy and painful trial.<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting that Jon conceded primary custody to Kate. I don't know the details of their time-sharing plan, but it seems that he could take a couple of kids each night. It could be like a round-robin. For me, I can handle my two girls nicely. But, I don't know what I would do with eight little ones running around.<br />
<br />
I wonder if the couple is going to follow a nesting concept, where they allow the children to stay in the house and the parents rotate in and out. I remember a special where both parents said that the house was "for the children," not for them. Does the same feeling still hold?<br />
<br />
The last challenge for the couple is determining a child support number. In Florida, the statutory chart for child support guidelines only go up to six children. Eight is literally "off the chart." Good luck Jon.Richard J. Mocklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07191175119232290515noreply@blogger.com