FLorida Alimony modification

[brokeinflorida]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? FL
Does anyone have any experience with the new florida statutes on modifying permanent alimony when the payee is cohabitating with a SO? Considering asking for a modification due to this situation, but not sure if the new statute is clear and if it will allow for the modification. Want to know my chances before stepping into a large legal bill. Thank you.

 

[tuffbrk]

Does the verbiage about alimony in your divorce decree include that it is modifiable?

 

[brokeinflorida]

It states that it is permanent, but it does not state that it is non-modifyable, they wanted that, but it was not agreed too.... the biggest question is that it is a fact that she is in a supportive relationship and cohabitating, but advice has been that floridas new statue is so ambiguous, that it may not matter.....it is RIDICULOUS!!!

 

[Bali Hai]

It states that it is permanent, but it does not state that it is non-modifyable, they wanted that, but it was not agreed too.... the biggest question is that it is a fact that she is in a supportive relationship and cohabitating, but advice has been that floridas new statue is so ambiguous, that it may not matter.....it is RIDICULOUS!!!

Did you agree to pay permanent alimony?

 

[brokeinflorida]

Yes, but they changed the laws in Florida to include cohabitation, she is living with her SO or many years being supported by him. How can she "double dip" when she is in a supportive relationship. I am looking for Case Law situations to see what kind of outcome there would be in court. I can't imagine a judge allowing her to be supported by two men, one she took to the cleaners and one she now sleeps with....She left, she left for the SO she now lives with!!! Are you familiar with how the new cohabitation laws are holding up in court in Florida?

 

[LdiJ]

Yes, but they changed the laws in Florida to include cohabitation, she is living with her SO or many years being supported by him. How can she "double dip" when she is in a supportive relationship. I am looking for Case Law situations to see what kind of outcome there would be in court. I can't imagine a judge allowing her to be supported by two men, one she took to the cleaners and one she now sleeps with....She left, she left for the SO she now lives with!!! Are you familiar with how the new cohabitation laws are holding up in court in Florida?

You probably are not going to find much, if any case law regarding the new statute, because its simply too new. Case law only gets published for cases at the appellate and supreme court levels. Trial court level cases do not get published.

The statute really hasn't been in existance long enough to have been challenged and to have made it that far.

 

[brokeinflorida]

So it is just a gamble, well bring me the dice, I would like to roll!

 

[Proserpina]

So it is just a gamble, well bring me the dice, I would like to roll!

Speak with a local attorney.

You really don't want an expensive court battle only to find that you'll still have to pay....

 

[mistoffolees]

So it is just a gamble, well bring me the dice, I would like to roll!

You can do that, but you're better off finding out if the dice are loaded in your favor or against you. While LD is right and there might not be much PUBLISHED case law, a local attorney might have seen some cases in the local court - and have an idea how the judge is likely to rule. Therefore, I agree with Pro- see a local attorney, at least for an initial consultation.

 

[LdiJ]

You can do that, but you're better off finding out if the dice are loaded in your favor or against you. While LD is right and there might not be much PUBLISHED case law, a local attorney might have seen some cases in the local court - and have an idea how the judge is likely to rule. Therefore, I agree with Pro- see a local attorney, at least for an initial consultation.

That is a very valid point. A local attorney may very well have seen some cases and could provide some insight on how judges in your area are ruling. Consulting one or two is better than flying blind.

 

[brokeinflorida]

Yes, obviously I need to consult with an attorney, I coudn't do this without an attorney. I was just wondering if anyone in this forum had information on how these cases are being decided before speaking with an attorney. Thanks all for the guidance, deffinitely going to pursue this!

 

[Bali Hai]

So it is just a gamble, well bring me the dice, I would like to roll!

It's going to boil down to the local judge's position on your facts, and, from horror stories I've read about FL, be prepared to appeal your case and be one of the first to provide case law history.

You are a perfect example of why nobody should agree to pay alimony, especially permanent alimony. You had nothing to lose by letting the issue get dumped in the judge's lap. If that were the case, I believe your chances of applying the new law and getting a modification would have been greatly increased.

The new law is controversial to say the least. Women's groups from all over the country have vigoruosly opposed that law and judge's are sensitive to that. Guess what judge's are elected to office.

Good luck.

 

[mistoffolees]

You are a perfect example of why nobody should agree to pay alimony, especially permanent alimony. You had nothing to lose by letting the issue get dumped in the judge's lap. If that were the case, I believe your chances of applying the new law and getting a modification would have been greatly increased.

That's not entirely true. A judge could order higher alimony than you might agree to. For example, if your attorney says that in similar cases, the judge might order $2,000 a month for 6 years in alimony and your stbx is willing to agree to $1,500 for 4 years, then it might be worth doing.

There is a somewhat greater risk as you've pointed out to agreeing to alimony, but that doesn't mean that it's always better to throw it in the judge's lap.

Of course, there are few (if any) cases where it makes sense to agree to permanent alimony, so I'd probably agree with you on that unless the number was very low and not modifiable.

 

[brokeinflorida]

Well, actually the day in court was already on the books and has since occurred.....alimony WAS reduced and significantly!!! Just saying!!! It still exists, but she did not have as great a need based on her SO living with her and contributing to her living expenses. Therefore Alimony was reduced based on his contribution. Happy Happy Day!!!!

 

[mistoffolees]

Well, actually the day in court was already on the books and has since occurred.....alimony WAS reduced and significantly!!! Just saying!!! It still exists, but she did not have as great a need based on her SO living with her and contributing to her living expenses. Therefore Alimony was reduced based on his contribution. Happy Happy Day!!!!

Wow. That sounds like a 'kissing your sister' decision. Seems to me that alimony should have been completely eliminated, not simply reduced, unless there were some significantly unusual circumstances.