Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Divorce

Distribution of cryptocurrency in a Florida divorce is becoming more common. Florida Statute 61.075 governs how assets and debts of the parties are divided when there is a divorce. In the case Coe v. Rautenberg, 4D22-510 (Fla. 4th DCA February 15, 2023) an issue arose when the trial court incorrectly distributed bitcoins between the parties after the former husband fell behind on his child support payments.

The former husband was ordered to pay temporary child support which he did not pay in full. The court determined the former husband owed over $12,000 in arrears. The court ordered the former husband to pay this to the former wife in the form of bitcoins that were to be divided in equitable distribution. The parties owned 10 bitcoins, and the court determined 1.2 bitcoins held the same value as the amount of child support arrears owed by the former husband. When the court ultimately distributed the bitcoins, it set aside 1.2 bitcoins to the former wife as her separate, non-marital property and then divided the remaining 8.8 bitcoins between the parties equally. Additionally, the court did not set a holiday and school break time-sharing schedule, nor did it rule on motions filed by the former wife before trial. The former wife appealed.

As to the bitcoin issue, the appellate court found error in the way the trial court distributed the cryptocurrency. It held “By deducting the 1.2 Bitcoins from the original 10 marital Bitcoins and then dividing the remaining 8.8 Bitcoins, the trial court improperly diminished Former Wife’s equitable distribution of the Bitcoin asset. This is because Former Wife had already been awarded the 1.2 Bitcoins from Former Husband’s share of the asset as payment for past due child support. In other words, Former Husband’s original marital share (5 Bitcoins) had already been reduced to 3.8 Bitcoins at the time of the final hearing. Therefore, the trial court should have awarded Former Wife her original share of the asset (5 Bitcoins) and Former Husband 3.8 Bitcoins.”

The appellate court found it was error not to include a holiday time-sharing schedule. It held “Despite recognizing at the hearing that the parties had an acrimonious parenting relationship, the trial court declined to set a holiday or school break timesharing schedule in the final judgment. Instead, the trial court left the responsibility of setting such a schedule to the parties. This was error.” In failing to rule on the former wife’s motion for retroactive child support, the appellate court also found error. The case was remanded to address these issues.

Schedule your meeting with a Miami family law attorney to understand how the law may apply to the facts of your case.