Welcome to our October edition of FAMSEG. Initially, this month’s message was going to focus on our upcoming In-State Retreat in Sarasota. However, the disruption and devastation brought about by Hurricane Ian is now at the forefront of all of our minds.
Immediately before the storm’s impact on our state, the Florida Bar posted a “Hurricane Information” page on its website. It contains information about both consumer and lawyer resources in this time of crisis, and additionally includes a page for “How Lawyers Can Help.” I urge you to visit this page at https://www.floridabar.org/public/consumer/hurricaneinfo/.
There are many ways to assist at this time. Many of you have now seen or heard about the state’s Florida Disaster Fund, which was established to receive donations in support of communities impacted by Hurricane Ian. This Fund is managed by Volunteer Florida and can be found at FloridaDisasterFund.org. An urgent call for blood donations was made the day after the storm as well – as a blood donor, I received one such text and am now a “pint low” myself. In addition, local Humane Societies along with other pet shelters around the state are in need of volunteers to help in this time of emergency. In short, please consider doing what you can to support those in need due to Hurricane Ian.
As to our In-State Retreat in Sarasota, we were happy to hear from both the Ritz Carlton Sarasota and Marina Jack’s restaurant that they are both fine following the storm and are still looking forward to seeing our group from October 20 through 23. In turn, I, along with our great Retreat Co-chairs Belinda Lazzara and Magistrate Beth Luna, look forward to seeing you there! Don’t forget that this event comes with a one-hour Technology CLE credit, with former Bar President John M. Stewart, Esq. speaking on “Cyber Security and Data Privacy in the Law Firm.” A link to the Section’s webpage regarding this event can be found at https://familylawfla.org/event/2022-in-state-retreat/.
Lastly, it is not too early to start planning to attend our next live meetings (our Mid-Year Meetings) that are scheduled for Thursday, January 26, 2023. Our Executive Council meeting is scheduled for two days later, on Saturday, January 28, 2023. The registration is now open for our annual Family Law Review Course (being co-hosted again with the AAML, Florida Chapter) that is taking place between our Section committee meetings and our EC meeting. Make sure to sign up early both for the course and a hotel room! We hope to see you at the Gaylord Palms in January!
Sincerely,
Philip S. Wartenberg
Chair, 2022-2023
|
|
CHAIR'S (RHETORICAL) QUESTION OF THE MONTH |
Isn’t this a great time to discuss the numerous changes to our practice that the Florida Supreme Court has made this past summer? Let’s review those changes now…
Recent amendments regarding the use of interrogatories were made in July to Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.340 (and Forms 12.930(b) & (c)):
In July, an opinion was issued on conducting family law court proceedings remotely (and removing the requirement of counsel’s signature from family law mediation agreements):
In August, the Court issued an opinion that strikes the prior requirement in Rule 12.200(c) that each circuit must use a “uniform” order setting pretrial conferences:
Finally, the Court issued another opinion in August, which requires motions for rehearing pursuant to Rule 12.530 to be filed in family law cases in order to preserve any objections to insufficient trial court findings:
|
|
|
|
LAST CHANCE TO ATTEND IN-STATE RETREAT!
October 20-22, 2022
|
|
One of our Section's most popular annual events takes place Thursday, Oct. 20 through Saturday, Oct. 22 at The Ritz Carlton Sarasota. Co-Chairs Belinda Lazzara and Magistrate Beth Luna have worked very hard to create a memorable event, and we are nearly sold out, so if you would like to attend, please register TODAY!
Register for the event HERE.
The event brochure and agenda can be found HERE.
|
|
By: Cash A. Eaton, B.C.S.
Inman v. Inman, 2022 WL 3390899 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022).
Inman, is a recent case out of the Fourth District Court of Appeal. The Inman opinion deals with an issue that is often subject to appeal, calculation of income for purposes of alimony. The case also addresses equitable distribution equalization payments.
I. Factual Summary
The Former Husband was a physical therapist working between 40 and 80 hours per week. His base pay was $101,000.00, approximately $8,415.00 per month. However, the Former Husband testified that he needed hip surgery and planned to reduce his work hours to thirty-two hours per week, thereby decreasing his income to $6,734.00 per month. Based on the Former Husband's future plans, the trial court calculated his monthly income as $6,500.00; a yearly income of $78,000.00. The Former Wife’s monthly income was $2,021.00, and the trial court determined that her monthly need was $3,021.00. Therefore, the trial court determined that the Former Husband’s alimony obligation was $1,000.00 per month.
The parties also owned a marital home. The trial court awarded the marital home to the Former Husband, and determined that he owed an equalization payment to the Former Wife of $53,281.00, to be paid back at a rate of $900.00 per month. Inexplicably, the trial court ordered the Former Husband to pay $100.00 per month in alimony, using the Former Wife's receipt of the $900.00 per month in equitable distribution payments to make up the full $1,000.00 deficit.
II. Calculation of Former Husband’s Income
The trial court’s determination of the Former Husband’s income was reversible error. A party’s income, for alimony purposes, cannot be based on speculation on what might happen in the future. The trial court’s calculation must be based on what existed at the time of the final hearing. Clearly, the trial court’s calculation was based on how the Former Husband’s health issues might affect his earning potential, which is not a sufficient basis to reduce a party’s income.
III. Equalization Payments
The trial court’s ruling concerning the Former Husband’s equalization payments was also overturned. Unequivocally, alimony is separate from the parties’ property rights. There is significant case law holding that a party should not be required to invade their capital assets to maintain her standard of living. Therefore, it was reversible error to require the Former Wife to use her $900 per month equalization payment towards her $1,000 monthly support need.
IV. Food for Thought
I pose some considerations to you, the reader and my colleague. Would it matter if the Former Husband’s hip surgery was scheduled a day after trial? A week after trial? A month after trial? Should it matter? Where is the line drawn between an absolute certainty and a future consideration? Are we promoting continuity in trial court rulings or shackling the sound judgment of the judiciary?
|
|
TECH TIP: Cloud Based Document Management |
|
By: Matthew E. Thatcher, B.C.S.
If the past years have taught us anything, it is that we need to be open to new approaches to existing paradigms. Very few attorneys, if any, still dictate into voice recorders their correspondence, pleadings and legal briefs that are later typed into documents by staff. Most written correspondence exchanged between counsel is sent as a PDF file by e-mail rather than in a physical envelope with a postage stamp. Pleadings and motions are now filed and served electronically rather than through the physical delivery of a paper copy to the courthouse and interested parties. Virtual appearances through video conference platforms have become so common that “in-person” hearings are becoming outliers reserved for trials and complicated evidentiary hearings.
As our profession has moved into a more electronic format, the tried-and-true practice of maintaining a physical case file is more cumbersome than helpful. There has to be a better way, and one which enables all of the members of our office teams to access files and move cases forward. That way forward is in the cloud.
All data must be stored somewhere. Cloud based solutions, unlike local servers, are better insulated from issues that could affect our local offices. If your office loses power, an onsite server holding case files will be rendered inaccessible, impeding the ability to work. A cloud based platform is not subject to the physical conditions or power supply at our local offices. The data and case files are accessible by any member of the team, from anywhere they may be in the world, provided they have a secure internet connection.
One option available is basic cloud based storage. These include platforms such as DropBox, Google Drive, and One Drive. These are good options for exchanging documents with discovery responses, but can become quickly cumbersome if used to store a case file. They are not easily searchable and there is no built in organizational framework.
The solution to that problem is cloud based document management platforms. Over time, there have been multiple different software companies that have developed cloud based platforms for use by law firms. Some of these platforms incorporate timekeeping and billing functions in addition to document management. Most integrate with e-mail programs so that case related e-mails can be archived and saved in the same manner as court filings, financial discovery, and other correspondence. Nearly all allow for the entirety of our case files to be stored electronically, and in an accessible, searchable, format.
Family law attorneys have our own styles, preferences and practice needs. Consequently, a cloud based platform that works well for one of us, may not be a good fit for another. The key is to find the one that works best with your respective practice.
A short list of potential cloud based legal document management platforms includes:
· Net Documents
· Clio
· Practice Panther
· Worldox
· ProLaw
|
|
COMMITTEE SPOTLIGHT: Domestic Violence |
|
October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
In recognition of this important month, FAMSEG recognizes the Section’s Domestic Violence Committee Co-Chaired by Philip Schipani of Sarasota and Anya Cintron Stern of Miami. Serving as Vice Chairs are Tenesia Hall of Orlando and Robin Scher of North Palm Beach. And the Co-Secretaries are Michelle Harper from Miami and Susanna Quesenberry of Saint Augustine.
The Committee is dedicated to the improvement of Florida’s domestic violence practice including, but not limited to, the study of practices and procedures around the State of Florida, tracking proposed legislation, and reviewing trends and changes.
The Committee additionally strives to educate Section members, the Judiciary and pro se litigants on domestic violence related issues. The Committee meets regularly in person and remotely to progress its goals. It recently met at the Biltmore Hotel in Coral Gables on August 25, 2022, and is in the process of organizing subcommittees and identifying additional goals to contribute to the Section’s success this year. Those interested in the Domestic Violence Committee are encouraged to email [email protected].
|
|
SPONSORS WANTED! If your business would like to reach nearly 4,000 Family Law professionals through our various communications platforms and in-person and virtual events, we invite you to consider Section sponsorship. To learn more about benefits and levels, email [email protected] or click HERE to learn more.
|
|
WRITERS WANTED! Want to submit an article for our monthly FAMSEG e-news, or our quarterly magazine, The Commentator? We can always use Tech Tips, Case Law Updates, and other relevant news for our 4,000+ members. Just email [email protected] for more information. Thank you for your interest in contributing to our member publications! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
