Florida law starts every analysis of equitable distribution with the presumption that all marital assets and debts should be split evenly between the two spouses. However, this presumption is not absolute. A court can order an unequal distribution of marital property if it finds that one of the statutory reasons justified a departure. In this article, we’ll discuss a decision by the Third District Court of Appeal that shows how the courts approach the question of equitable distribution.
Background of the case
This case originated from a divorce action after a long period of marital cohabitation. The trial court equally distributed the marital assets among the two parties. However, the TSP was not equally distributed. Instead, the parties retained their own TSP. This meant that the marital assets were not equally distributed.
However, in arriving at the decision to distribute the marital assets unevenly, the trial court based its decision on the actions of one of the parties during the period of cohabitation. The party’s actions were destructive. Section 61.075 of the Florida Statutes states that misconduct or intentional dissipation, waste, or destruction of marital assets may warrant unequal distribution if equity so requires.
The receiving party of the uneven share of the marital assets appealed the decision of the trial court on the basis that there were insufficient findings of fact and competent evidence to warrant unequal distribution.
The appeal
In this case, the former wife appealed the decision. The Third District Court of Appeal acknowledged that Florida courts are indeed given discretion to deviate from an equal distribution if the factors outlined in the statute are satisfied. The court emphasized the importance of marital misconduct, particularly if such misconduct diminishes marital assets.
The Third District Court of Appeal, in this case, ruled that the trial court’s decision was faulty. The trial court identified destructive conduct as the basis to justify dividing the marital estate unevenly, but the court did not adequately explain the basis on which the destructive conduct led to the unequal distribution.
Equitable distribution must be supported by substantial evidence and detailed findings. The Third District Court of Appeal therefore reversed the award and remanded the case to the trial court with the instruction to adequately support their findings or distribute the assets evenly.
Key takeaways
The Third District Court recognized the fact that the Florida courts indeed have discretion to vary the equal distribution of the marital assets as long as the criteria set by the Florida legislature are met. The court also recognized the significance of the misconduct in the marriage, especially if the misconduct results in the depletion of the marital assets.
The Third District Court, however, ruled that the trial court’s approach was flawed. The trial court recognized the destructive conduct as a basis for unequal distribution; however, the court did not explain the basis for its decision. Hence, the matter was overturned on appeal.
Talk to a Tampa, FL, Family Law Attorney Today
Westchase Law, P.A., represents the interests of Tampa residents who are going through divorce. Call our Tampa family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.
Source:
law.justia.com/cases/florida/third-district-court-of-appeal/2025/3d24-0431.html