Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Divorce
When a divorce case is filed in Florida, and a divorce case involving the same parties is also filed in another country, which court has jurisdiction to decide the issues in the case? The answer is not always simple, but the case Vicario v. Blanch, 3D19-1044 (Fla. 3d DCA August 19, 2020) is an example of how a Florida court may analyze competing petitions for divorce in different jurisdictions.
The parties were married in 2008 in Spain and had two minor children. By the time a petition for divorce was filed by the husband in 2018, the parties had lived in Florida for more than five years. The parties entered a prenuptial agreement and also a postnuptial agreement. Two years before the divorce proceedings were initiated, a criminal and civil case was brought against the husband and wife in Spain.
After filing his initial petition for divorce, three weeks later, the husband filed an amended petition to which the wife responded and litigation ensued. Less than a month after that, the husband filed a petition for divorce in Spain and shortly thereafter dismissed his Florida petition. On the same day the husband dismissed his petition, the wife filed a petition for divorce. The wife was served with the Spain petition and her motion to dismiss that petition was denied by a Spanish court. The husband then filed a motion to dismiss, abate or stay the Florida proceeding in light of the Spanish proceeding. At a hearing on the motion, the court heard from Spanish law experts for both sides, and it was established that the Spanish court only had jurisdiction to declare the parties divorced - that court could not adjudicate issues regarding property in Florida, financial issues, or the children’s issues. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss and declared that Spain had jurisdiction over the divorce, except for the children’s issues which would remain in Florida. The wife appealed.
First, the appellate court explained “‘In general, where courts within one sovereignty have concurrent jurisdiction over substantially similar parties and claims, the court which first exercises its jurisdiction acquires exclusive jurisdiction to proceed with that case.’ Parker v. Estate of Bealer, 890 So. 2d 508, 512 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) [internal citations omitted]. This is known as the principle of priority. Id. The principle of priority ‘is not applicable between sovereign jurisdictions as a matter of duty.’ Id.; [internal citation omitted] ‘As a matter of comity, however, a court of one state may, in its discretion, stay a proceeding pending before it on the grounds that a case involving the same subject matter and parties is pending in the court of another state.’ [internal citations omitted]. The principles of comity apply not only to proceedings pending in two different state courts but to proceedings pending in a state court and a foreign court.”
Deciding it was error for the trial court to dismiss the case, the appellate court held “By deferring all issues except for the Children’s issues to the court in Spain, the lower court allowed the Husband to ‘freeze out’ the Wife from any relief pertaining to the parties’ marital assets and liabilities in Florida. The court in Spain can only adjudicate the parties’ dissolution of their marriage. The only court that would have jurisdiction over the parties’ marital assets and liabilities in Florida, and all Children’s issues, is the court herein below. Further, because it is undisputed that the court in Spain has no authority or jurisdiction to determine anything other than the actual dissolution of the parties’ marriage, the scope of the proceeding in Spain is limited, and, therefore, cannot be said to involve ‘substantially similar parties and substantially similar claims.’”
No two divorce cases are exactly the same. That is why it is important to get advice from a Miami divorce lawyer tailored to the specific facts of your situation. Schedule a consultation to discuss your case.