Question:
I was divorced back in 2006. My Former Husband and I have two sons, ages 12 and 14. Our sons are good kids, get good grades are active in sports and their father, admittedly, does have a good relationship with the boys. My Husband sees the children on alternating weekends from Friday after school until the following Monday morning; usually one to two evenings per week; equal time during all major holidays; and one-half of the Summer. He has not missed any occasion to spend time with our children, and he is further active in our sons’ sports.

About 3 years ago, I obtained my Masters’ Degree and have since pursued a career as an adjunct professor at the local community college. I recently received tenure but the position offers no career advancement and is not in the area of education for which I have been trained and published. I have searched for a full time position with career advancement in my area of specialty but was only able to find a position at a reputable college in Illinois. The initial starting salary is comparable to what I am currently earning but within two years, I may be making two times what I am currently earning notwithstanding benefits.

I emailed my Former Husband of my desire to relocate to Illinois with our sons and to offer him extended holiday and summer time sharing as well as sharing the costs of transportation. Needless to say, my Former Husband went ballistic and adamantly objected to taking the boys to another jurisdiction. May I relocate with our sons? The opportunity is not available here in Florida, and I truly believe this move will enhance the quality of our sons’ lives.

Answer:
If you desire to relocate with your sons to another jurisdiction more than 50 miles away from your current residence for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days, then you will need to request permission from the Court by way of filing a Petition. Section 61.13001, F.S. If a parenting plan is already in place thereby giving your Former Husband court-ordered time sharing, then you will need to further put forth a “revised postrelocation schedule for access and time-sharing” Section 61.13001(3)(a), F.S.

The Court will evaluate a variety of factors in determining whether the relocation is in the children’s best interests. Although the move may enhance your career, this is not the primary basis for the move. You would need to prove, among other factors, that the “relocation will enhance the general quality of life for both the parent or other person seeking the relocation and the child, including, but not limited to, financial or emotional benefits or educational opportunities”. Section 61.13001(7), F.S.

The Father has grounds to object to the relocation. I believe the most difficult aspect of your request would be whether the substitute time sharing schedule will be “. . . [feasible in] preserving the relationship between the nonrelocating parent … and the child” in light of the Father’s apparent bonded relationship with the children. The alternative time sharing clearly will not provide the Father with the same level of frequency of time sharing or an ability to take part in the children’s activities. Although Florida Law does suggest that the substitute arrangements do not have to provide the same level of frequency of time sharing, your Husband will probably argue that he not only time-shares, but is an active participant in the children’s lives and that the relocation will severely hamper this bond. Let’s assume your Husband is current with his support obligation and that this was never an issue. This is another argument in his favor. Section 61.13001(7)(h), F.S. Finally, your Husband may argue that the move will not enhance the general quality of life of both you and your son’s lives and that any economic gain is speculative.

If you are seeking to relocate, the request in and of itself does not serve as a basis for the other parent seeking a modification of the parenting plan/ time sharing. A modification of the parenting plan and time sharing must be based on a substantial change(s) in circumstance, and a request to relocate does not amount to such a change in circumstance.

The Courts truly struggle with relocation cases, especially where the children have a bonded relationship with the non-requesting parent; the children have established roots in their community including extended family and school; and, the proof of enhancement in the general quality of life is alleged but not a given. Again, the main focal point is the best interests of the children.

The foregoing is not intended as legal advice. If you are in need of legal advice and/ or more information on the recent amendments to Florida’s alimony statute (section 61.08), the please feel free to schedule a free initial consultation.

Answer:
I would argue that you have a claim to the “passive appreciation” of your Husband’s non-marital Home under current Florida Law. The Florida supreme court recently came out with an opinion in the matter of Kaaa v. Kaaa, 39 Fla. L. Weekly S521 (Fla. 2010) which provides that passive appreciation of a non-marital asset may be a marital asset under certain circumstances, which as here, a mortgage is encumbering the Property (or was encumbering the Property during the marriage); and you have contributed towards both the mortgage and other expenses associated with the Property.  Your entitlement to a claim is against the appreciation/ enhancement in value of the non-marital Home and not the Home itself.  Further, you would have the burden of proof that your monetary contributions and/or marital efforts “enhanced the value” of the Home.

For example, let’s say the Home was worth $X at the date of marriage and was encumbered with a mortgage of $Y.  Further, during the marriage, the parties applied their respective earnings (marital funds) towards the payment of the mortgage (principal reduction) and the improvement and repair of the Property.  Let’s further assume that the mortgage balance had been reduced during the Marriage and the Property’s value increased by $100,000.  If you prove that your monetary contributions resulted in principal reduction of the mortgage; that improvements (such as, without limitation, the addition of a swimming pool, new roof, conversion of a car-port into a garage, room addition; etc) enhanced the value of the Home; and that your marital efforts towards repairs and maintenance of the Home increased it’s value, then you would be entitled to a claim against the Home’s appreciation in value (against the $100,000 enhancement in the example, above, not the Home itself).

The foregoing is not intended as legal advice.  If you are in need of legal advice and/ or more information on the recent amendments to Florida’s alimony statute (section 61.08), the please feel free to schedule a free initial consultation.

Answer:
Effective July 1, 2010, recent amendments to Florida’s alimony statute took effect. In regards to your question, Florida law now defines a long term marriage as 17 years or longer in length; a moderate term as being 7 years but less than 17 years; and a short term as being less than 7 years. Your marriage falls within the moderate term and permanent alimony may be awarded to you. For example, you may argue that your Husband has a significantly higher earning capacity than you as well as a higher education level. Further, you may argue that the most you can earn is $50,000 in today’s market whereas your Husband may be able to earn even more than his current level in light of his employment skills.

In the event you are not awarded permanent alimony, Florida law now provides for “durational alimony” which may also be awarded in moderate-term marriages. Durational alimony is awarded to “provide a party with economic assistance for a set period of time” when permanent alimony may not be appropriate. Section 61.08(7), Florida Statutes. I would argue that, in light of your living/ household expenses as well as standard of living expenses, such as grooming, social clubs, entertainment and vacations, you are a candidate for durational alimony.

Another form of alimony is “bridge-the-gap” alimony, which is awarded “to assist a party by providing support to allow the party to make a transition from being married to being single.”  Section 61.08(5), Florida Statutes. The length of such an award may not exceed two years.  Again, based on the information provided by you, I would argue that you have a claim to permanent alimony, in the alternative, durational alimony for a period of time exceeding more than two years.

The foregoing is not intended as legal advice.  If you are in need of legal advice and/ or more information on the recent amendments to Florida’s alimony statute (section 61.08), the please feel free to schedule a free initial consultation.

Answer:
I would argue that you are entitled to an unequal distribution of the condominium and that same should be awarded to you. If you purchased your condominium after you and your spouse separated, but BEFORE either of you filed for divorce, then the condominium is a marital asset subject. According to Florida Law, the starting point for a division of the marital assets and liabilities is an equal (50/50) division, but a lengthy separation is a justification for disparate treatment of any marital asset purchased post-separation.

If you and your spouse have been living separate and apart for over 4 years and have separate households and finances, then I would argue the condominium should be awarded as part of an unequal distribution to you, and that your spouse is not entitled to any portion of the condominium.