Rutan v. Rutan is a case that had been previously remanded for findings. The 2d DCA again remanded the case for findings justifying its award of alimony. The trial court (in Pinellas County) found that the Wife had met her burden of proving ability to pay, but the findings are insufficient to allow the appellate […]
Corcoran v. Corcoran
In Corcoran v. Corcoran, the 5th DCA remanded the final judgment for required findings to be made on four separate issues where they were missing: alimony, attorney’s fees, equitable distribution, and shared parental responsibility. Corcoran v Corcoran
Berg v. Young
Berg v. Young concerns the interpretation of a prenuptial agreement. Ultimately the 4th DCA reversed the finding regarding a denial of attorney’s fees because the prevailing party should have been awarded his fees based upon a plain reading of the agreement. Also reversed was the award to the wife of attorney’s fees based upon section […]
Vaelizadeh v. Hossaini
In Vaelizadeh v. Hossaini the 4th DCA tackled the issue of an untimely objection to relocation. The trial court found that the Father’s objection to the proposed relocation was untimely and thus entered a final judgment allowing the relocation, but the appellate court reversed and remanded the case for five reasons: The father had filed […]
What assets and liabilities are considered marital, and how are they divided under Florida law?
Florida Statute 61.075 sets out criteria for classifying assets and liabilities. The first step to understanding what you and your significant other have in the marital estate is to determine two key periods of time. First, you must determine the date of your marriage. That date will be the starting point for classifying marital versus […]
Temares v. Temares
In Temares v. Temares, the appellate court reversed an order for compulsory mental health and substance abuse evaluation. There was no good cause for the evaluations. The “in controversy” and “good cause” requirements for a compulsory evaluation require an affirmative showing by the movant that each condition as to which the examination is sought is […]
Suarez v. Orta
In Suarez v. Orta, the trial court adopted a report and recommendations by a general magistrate over timely-filed objections. This was error. Apparently the trial court did not treat the objections as Exceptions, focusing on the title of the document rather than its substance. Pleadings by pro se litigants should only be defined by their […]
Dorworth v. Dorworth
Alimony and Equitable Distribution of marital assets and debts are tools that courts can, and often do, use to achieve equity. So long as there is competent substantial evidence supporting findings of valuation, and the required statutory findings regarding ED and alimony are made, courts have great discretion to fashion distribution and support schemes that […]
Testa v. Testa
In Testa v. Testa the appellate court reminds us that before imposing the sanction of barring a litigant from pro se filings, the trial court must first issue an order to show cause and provide notice to the pro se litigant and a reasonable opportunity to respond. Testa v Testa
Timesharing and Custody Factors
When Florida courts fashion timesharing plans, there are multiple factors which the Court must consider to determine the plan that is in the best interest of the children. The factors considered by the Court can be found in Florida Statute 61.13(3). It is important to understand each factor and to do your best to follow […]