Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Alimony
When a party wants to enforce an alimony judgment that was entered in another state, does Florida law apply to the matter or the law of the state where the alimony was established? In the case Lavinder v. Bryson, 1D2023-2022 (Fla. 1st DCA August 21, 2024), the trial court applied Alabama law in resolving a dispute between former spouses over alimony payments.
The parties were divorced in Alabama after entering a marital settlement agreement which required the former husband to pay $1,000 per month to the former wife in periodic alimony. Over time, the former Husband’s social security benefits covered this payment to the former wife, so the former husband stopped paying the former wife the $1,000 per month. The former husband moved to Florida and the former wife sought to enforce the order in Florida against the former husband. She filed a motion for contempt, alleging the former husband was not paying the alimony.
The trial court held a hearing and applied Alabama law to the issue, finding that under that state’s laws, “Social Security benefits may be used to satisfy an alimony obligation or stated another way, were a credit against alimony due.” The former wife continued to litigate the issue, and the trial court issued an order which reiterated Alabama law and found the alimony “terminated as a matter of law.” The trial court also terminated “as a matter of law” the requirement that the former husband maintain a life insurance policy to secure the alimony payments. The former wife appealed.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s ruling insofar as it held the social security benefits could satisfy the former husband’s alimony obligation. The court also noted that the former wife did not appear at the contempt hearing, so she did not present any evidence to indicate the former husband was in contempt. However, the court reversed as to the trial court’s finding that alimony and the life insurance requirement were terminated as a matter of law. The court held “First, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to terminate the alimony requirement. See § 88.2111(2), Fla. Stat. (“A tribunal of this state may not modify a spousal support order issued by a tribunal of another state or foreign country having continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over that order under the law of that state or foreign country.”). Second, under Frazier , an alimony obligation is not terminated through the payment of Social Security benefits. Rather, the party required to pay alimony receives a credit against an alimony obligation for Social Security payments or benefits received by the other party. See Frazier, 455 So. 2d at 885. To be sure, such a credit may completely satisfy or exceed Mr. Bryson’s alimony obligation (in which case he could be due a reimbursement), but that credit does not extinguish the alimony obligation. Thus, we remand with instructions that the language terminating the alimony ‘as a matter of law’ be stricken from the order.”
Schedule your meeting with a Miami family law attorney to determine how the law may apply to your case.