Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Divorce

In a Florida divorce case that involved a dispute over responsibility for payment of fines levied against an improperly moored boat, the former spouses also disputed alimony and equitable distribution. This is discussed in the case Frank v. Frank, 3D19-1705 (Fla. 3d DCA January 6, 2021).

The parties were married for over twenty years when the former wife filed for divorce. The former husband earned approximately $195,000 per year while the former wife had an earning capacity of about $75,000.00 per year. According to the appellate opinion, “After a bench trial, the court entered a final judgment that (1) established an equitable distribution scheme mainly benefitting the former wife, (2) awarded her $2,000 per month in alimony of an unspecified type and duration, (3) awarded child support which had been previously granted, and (4) established a parenting plan which had been agreed to by the parties.” The former husband and the former wife both appealed.

The former husband first argued there was error in the equitable distribution scheme. The appellate court agreed with him, holding “Here, the final judgment makes only a cursory reference to the statutory requirement that the parties' ‘assets and liabilities should be equitably distributed.’ There is no discussion of any of the statutory factors. Because of this absence of findings, the portion of the final judgment concerning equitable distribution is reversed, and the case remanded for the trial court to reassess equitable distribution and make the requisite factual findings pursuant to section 61.075.” The trial court was further instructed “"to expressly resolve the issue of whether the former husband's disability insurance payments should be treated as a marital asset subject to equitable distribution or as a stream of income for alimony, a matter the final judgment leaves unresolved."

The former husband next argued there were insufficient findings of his ability to pay alimony. The appellate court agreed with him, holding the trial court did not make sufficient findings in this regard, that the final judgment gave no indication of what type of alimony was being awarded, and it was unclear in the final judgment how the alimony was calculated. Therefore, the alimony award was reversed for the trial court to make these findings.

Last, the former wife appealed the court’s apportionment of debt on an improperly moored boat owned by the parties. The former husband was ordered to be responsible for 75% of the debt and the former wife 25%. The appellate court held “At the bench trial, the former wife's counsel argued that the lien, which amounted to almost a quarter of a million dollars, should be the former husband's sole responsibility because he disobeyed court orders requiring the boat be kept with a boat broker. However, the former wife could have sought an alternative remedy prior to trial when the former husband defied the court's orders regarding the storage of the boat to avoid the staggering fees imposed on both parties.”

A Florida divorce case can present complicated issues. Schedule a consultation with a Miami divorce lawyer to understand what you can expect in your case.