Modifying Final Judgments Part II:

Don’t just settle to get this over…Get it right the first time and fight for what you want in your divorce or paternity case right now. Last week, we discussed the fact that equitable distribution judgments are generally non-modifiable. This week we will examine modification of custody orders. Fla. Stat. 61.13(3) states, “…A determination of […]

Read More

Forssell v. Forssell

In Forssell vs. Forssell, the appellate court reversed a non-final order suspending time-sharing because the trial court did not indicate what if any steps would be required of the father to reinstate his time-sharing. The appellate court also reversed and remanded an order denying the dismissal of a separate domestic violence injunction. Both parties requested […]

Read More

Stusch vs. Jiruska

In Stusch vs. Jiruska, the appellate court reversed and remanded an order finding the former husband in Contempt because the trial court erred in not granting a continuance and conducting a hearing without the former husband present. The trial court should have granted a continuance based upon the pro se letter from the former husband […]

Read More

What is “income” for purposes of child support calculations?

And how does Florida factor in disability benefits that go directly to the opposing party? First, F.S. 61.046(8) states, “‘Income’ means any form of payment to an individual, regardless of source, including, but not limited to: wages, salary, commissions and bonuses, compensation as an independent contractor, worker’s compensation, disability benefits, annuity and retirement benefits, pensions, […]

Read More

Cell Phones and Social Media in Family Law Litigation: “Don’t say, or do, anything online, or via text, that you wouldn’t say, or do, in front of the judge.”

This is a very difficult subject to try to give advice upon because most of us are not feeling what you are feeling in that moment when you press “send” or “post.” During the family law litigation process emotions are high and reactions are rapid and unpredictable. To even the most calm and centered of […]

Read More

Rosenblum v. Rosenblum

Rosenblum v Rosenblum Rosenblum v. Rosenblum involves pro se litigants feeling their way through a typical set of circumstances. The former husband first filed a Motion to Modify Child Support (there is no discussion as to why it was appropriate to consider that as a motion rather than as a supplemental petition), and before that […]

Read More

Wolfson v. Wolfson

Wolfson v. Wolfson from the 3d DCA is a post-judgment case that has been highly litigated, even years after the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. In this iteration of the case, a temporary modification of timesharing, granted by the trial court after hearing only the former husband’s part of the case, was overturned and […]

Read More

Bailey v. Bailey

Bailey v. Bailey concerned the granting by the trial court of a motion for psychosocial and substance abuse evaluation. The Appellate court quashed the order because the motion was filed the same day as the hearing, and thus there was inadequate notice. The evidence that was adduced suggested that some type of psychological evaluation might […]

Read More

Vaelizadeh v. Hossaini

In Vaelizadeh v. Hossaini the 4th DCA tackled the issue of an untimely objection to relocation. The trial court found that the Father’s objection to the proposed relocation was untimely and thus entered a final judgment allowing the relocation, but the appellate court reversed and remanded the case for five reasons: The father had filed […]

Read More