Articles Posted in Family Law

Sometimes, your divorce may have a substantial impact on your personal life but be limited to that. Other times, your divorce has the potential to impact both your personal life and your business life. A court order in your divorce case that freezes all your assets, for example, may have a significant and debilitating effect on your business activities, as well as impair your ability to meet your personal financial obligations. Avoiding such problems requires many steps, including mounting an aggressive defense to avoid outcomes like an injunction that freezes your assets. When you find yourself in such a divorce battle, it pays to have skilled South Florida divorce counsel on your side.

A recent Broward County case was an example of this. In the case, the wife, C.O., had obtained a divorce judgment that required the husband, W.O., to pay both alimony and child support. Sometime later, the wife obtained a judgment for certain unpaid amounts of alimony and child support. Following her obtaining that judgment, the wife went back to court and sought an injunction that would have frozen all of the husband’s assets, including his impending inheritance.

When your spouse seeks an injunction, such as one that would freeze all of your assets, the law requires her to provide the court with certain evidence before the court grants the request and issues the injunction. For one thing, the party who asked for the injunction has to demonstrate that she has a substantial likelihood of winning in the underlying litigation action. Additionally, she has to show that, if the court doesn’t grant her the injunction for which she’s asked, then she will suffer “irreparable” harm. Generally, any type of harm that can be fully and fairly compensated later through an award of money damages cannot constitute “irreparable” harm under the law.

Sometimes, if you possess substantial assets, you may find yourself in a situation in which personal affairs and business affairs overlap. For example, what happens if you discover that the spouse whom you are in the process of divorcing has improperly taken funds from your accounts? Must you litigate these issues in the divorce, or can you bring a separate civil lawsuit? If you find yourself facing a circumstance like this, you should be certain to contact knowledgeable Florida divorce counsel in order to get the answers you need to protect yourself and your business.

The questions in the preceding paragraph were central to a recent case originating in Palm Beach County. In that Palm Beach case, the husband held several substantial assets that, according to the husband, the wife improperly re-directed to herself and her mother. According to the husband’s lawsuit for breach of contract and tortious interference with a business relationship, the wife’s misconduct caused the husband to be rejected for a mortgage on a $2.5 million house.

At the same time that the husband was attempting to proceed with his tortious interference and breach of contract case, he also had filed a petition for divorce. The trial court in the husband’s contract case concluded that the contract lawsuit must be dismissed. Whatever misconduct the wife did or did not commit, she did it during the marriage, which meant that the divorce case was the one and only proper place to litigate those issues, according to the trial judge.

There are high-wealth South Florida divorces and then there are very high-wealth divorces. Back in July, the Palm Beach Post reported on the divorce of a couple who achieved significant success together in real estate, amassing wealth estimated to be around $750 million. Then, after more than six decades of marriage, the wife filed for divorce. The case presents an example of the many issues and complexities that can come into play when high-wealth individuals decide to divorce.

The then-newlywed couple, starting in the early 1950s, took a few investment properties and a business established literally in their kitchen and, over the next six decades plus, built an empire worth close to three-quarters of a billion dollars. Then, in 2016, the wife filed for divorce. The alleged motivation for the split was one that was not particularly unusual. According to the Post, the wife claimed the husband had found a new love and refused to end the relationship after she demanded it.

However, most couples’ divorces don’t entail numerous multi-million-dollar assets. The portfolio included shops in Palm Beach, restaurants in Delray Beach, bars in the Keys, and retail complexes in New York. The couple’s Palm Beach County assets alone were estimated to be worth roughly $160 million. Divorce matters involving large amounts of high-value assets can be complicated. First, the court must determine which assets are marital and which are non-marital. Additionally, the court must determine the value of each of the assets. This latter requirement was a main focus in this divorce, with “appraisers and accountants try[ing] to sort out the complexities,” the Post reported.

Sometimes, litigating a divorce action can be expensive. In addition to your legal team’s hours spent litigating your case on your behalf, you may also need other experts, like forensic accountants, working on your case. Even if you have substantial wealth, obtaining the liquid assets needed to pay these bills can be complicated. In some cases, resolving this problem may mean selling a major asset. However, once the asset sells, how should the sale proceeds be divided? A recent case originating from Palm Beach County addressed this issue.

Continue reading →

In a high-asset divorce case in Florida, there are lots of efforts that go into determining the outcome. There’s collecting and developing relevant factual evidence that demonstrates the strength of your arguments. There is also knowledge of procedural rules and an understanding of how to use them to your most beneficial effect. In a recent Miami case, a husband’s well-timed dismissal motion proved critical in allowing him to avoid the imposition of a substantial alimony obligation.

Continue reading →

A recent decision issued by the Fourth District Court of Appeal regarding the proper amount of child support to be paid by a father who made roughly $2 million annually addressed a sometimes challenging issue for the courts:  how to calculate the proper amount of child support for the children of an extremely high-income parent. In this case, the appeals court upheld the lower court’s decision to follow the child support guidelines, leaving in place an order that demanded a monthly child support payment of nearly $9,000.

Continue reading →

The breakup of a for-profit medical school founder’s 50-plus-year marriage helped fuel a multitude of legal actions, with the founder’s wife seeking to freeze the assets of the university through the equitable distribution process, while the husband accused the wife of abusing the legal process to tie up money that belonged to the school and other companies. A Florida court recently ruled against the wife, ordering her to pay roughly $6.8 million in damages for wrongfully seeking and obtaining an injunction that froze nearly $100 million in assets, as dailybusinessreview.com reported.

Continue reading →

If you are someone with high-value assets, a prenuptial agreement can be a vital part of your premarital planning. A well-drafted prenuptial agreement can offer a strong degree of protection in the possibility of a future divorce. In the case of one Florida man, his prenuptial agreement offered protection not when he divorced but when he died. In a recent ruling, the Second District Court of Appeal decided that the man and his wife’s prenuptial agreement prevented her from getting an additional half-million dollar payment from the man’s estate.

The case centered on the 2009 prenuptial agreement signed by Natalia and Andrew Shaw. Prenuptial agreements can provide certain protections to each spouse, especially in situations in which the spouses enter the marriage with high-value collections of assets. In the Shaws’ situation, they agreed that the wife would, upon the occasion of the husband’s death, receive the sum of one-half million dollars, as long as neither of them had filed for divorce prior to the man’s death.

Continue reading →

A recent decision entered by the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Daytona Beach offers a stern warning to spouses who use misconduct in order to gain access to marital funds to invest. The case makes clear that one of the potential risks of engaging in misconduct in order to make an investment may be shouldering the full amount of the debt should you and your spouse divorce. In the Fifth Circuit case, a director of, and investor in, a Florida bank that failed had a $100,000 loan count as his separate, non-marital debt because he forged his wife’s signature on the loan documents.

Barry Mills was on the Board of Directors and a major investor in Florida State Bank, a startup bank established in 2007. Each of the bank’s directors was required to make an investment, and Mills’ portion was more than a quarter-million dollars. Mills’ wife, Brenda Mills, knew that her husband was a director of, and investor in, the bank, but she did not know the extent of the investment. Since the husband did not have sufficient cash available to make the full required investment, he acquired an additional $100,000 by taking out a second mortgage on the marital home. Fearing that the wife would not approve of the investment and the second mortgage, the husband did not ask her to sign the loan documents and instead forged her signature on the paperwork.

Continue reading →

Dividing a couple’s assets as part of a divorce case is often a challenging task in many situations. This can be especially so in cases involving spouses who own businesses. The case may present issues of high-value assets, debts, or both, depending on the business’ success or failure. In one long-running South Florida case involving a dentist and his wife, the husband lost his effort to increase the negative-value calculation of his business because, according to a 4th District Court of Appeal ruling, he was not entitled to offer new evidence about the value of his practice when the case went back before the trial court after an appeal. The value of the couple’s assets was not one of the issues sent back to the trial court by the appeals court, so the admission of that evidence and the resulting change in the couple’s equitable distribution should never have happened.

The couple’s divorce case actually began several years ago. In the original case, the husband put forward evidence that his dental practice was actually deeply in the red. After the trial court issued its order of dissolution, the husband pursued an appeal on several grounds, including the way in which the court treated the couple’s home in the equitable distribution and the requirement that the husband obtain and maintain a $2 million life insurance policy to protect the alimony and child support awards. The husband also argued that the trial court failed to account for the negative value of his dental practice.

Continue reading →