Florida Case Law:
Important NOTE: The rulings and decisions of the various Florida appellate courts and the Florida Supreme Court provide guidance to the trial courts of Florida on the various issues that the trial courts must deal with. The cases we have cited below are related to the various issues involved in family law and are provided here for general information purposes. These summaries are not intended to be legal advice. The facts of each case are vitally important in determining whether or not a prior case is precedent for your situation. Because of the extensive nature of the fact patterns involved in these cases, we cannot reprint them here. So, please be aware, that the following case rulings may or may not apply to your situation and you should consult with an Attorney, licensed to practice law in the state of Florida, to determine how they apply to you. Also, please be aware that these cases are based in Florida and only apply in Florida.
Alimony:
Canakaris v. Canakaris (Florida Supreme Court – 1980)
Alimony is used to provide for the needs of the former spouse based upon the standard of living established by the parties during their marriage. The two factors to be considered by the Court are the need of one spouse and then the ability of the other spouse to contribute toward the needs of the first.
Melton v. Melton (2nd District Court of Appeals - 2012)
The Husband’s expenses for charitable contributions were not deductible from his income in calculating his ability to pay permanent periodic alimony.
Vitro v. Vitro (4th District Court of Appeals – 2012)
Retroactive alimony can be awarded back to the date of the filing of the Petition for Dissolution.
Custody of Children: (Also see Parenting Plans and Time Sharing)
Crittenden v. Davis (4th DCA – 2012)
The trial court cannot modify parental responsibility unless there has been a substantial change in circumstances involving the children.
Wade v. Hirschman (Florida Supreme Court – 2005)
A trial court decides the initial custody of children under Florida statute §61.13 in accordance with the best interest of the child.
A final decree granting custody can only be modified when there has been a substantial change of circumstances.
There must be a substantial change in circumstances in order for the trial court to change “custody.” A substantial change occurs with the situation has changed in a substantial and material way that was not reasonable contemplated at the time the Court issued its original ruling.
Equitable Distribution:
Blossman v. Blossman (1st District Court of Appeal – 2012)
The trial court averaged two experts opinions as to the value of stock owned by the parties. The appellate court reversed the trial court because “averaging” is a prohibited method of valuation in Florida.
Holtz v. Holtz (4th District Court of Appeal – 2012)
The trial court cannot use its powers of contempt to enforce equitable distribution.
Hedman v. Hedman (3rd District Court of Appeal – 2012)
A marital home titled to both parties as “tenants by the entirety” is a marital asset, even where home was paid for by husband’s relative.
Goldstein v. Goldstein (4th District Court of Appeal – 2012)
A trial court cannot distribute an account that was depleted during the dissolution process unless the account was depleted as a result of an intentional wasting of the funds for non-marital purposes.
Judicial Discretion:
Canakaris v. Canakaris (Florida Supreme Court – 1980)
The power of a Court to use its personal judgment.
Discretion is abused when “no reasonable man” could reach the same conclusion as the Court.
Prenuptial Agreements:
Simon v. Simon (4th District Court of Appeals – 2012)
A prenuptial agreement cannot waive “temporary relief” (spousal support and/or an award of temporary attorney’s fees and costs). Only “support” to be paid after the dissolution is final can be waived in a prenuptial agreement.
Parenting Plans and Time Sharing:
Mayo v. Mayo (2nd DCA – 2012)
The trial court cannot modify a time sharing schedule without addressing best interest of the children.
