Chaired by Marck Joseph, B.C.S., and Michael Mendoza, Esq.

The Support Issues Committee of the Family Law Section of The Florida Bar is dedicated to addressing critical questions and challenges related to financial support in family law cases. As a collaborative body of attorneys, judges, and professionals, the Committee focuses on matters involving child support, spousal support, and other financial obligations that arise during divorce, paternity, and related proceedings. Through ongoing research, discussion, and education, members work to identify emerging trends, clarify legislative changes, and develop best practices that enhance the fair and effective administration of support issues in family cases across Florida.

The Committee regularly reviews statutes, case law, and administrative rules to ensure practitioners and judicial officers have access to up-to-date guidance and resources. It also provides a forum for members to share experiences and propose solutions to complex support-related matters. By fostering communication and professional development, the Committee takes an active role in shaping policy and advocating for improvements that benefit families and the legal community alike.

If you are interested in making a difference in support-related issues and expanding your expertise in family law, we warmly invite you to attend our upcoming meetings. Whether you are a seasoned practitioner or just starting your journey in family law, your perspective is valuable. Join us as we work together to address support issues and promote positive outcomes for Florida’s families! For meeting schedules and details on how to participate, please contact support@familylawfla.org.

By Jennifer Patti, Esq.


Do you feel like you’re spending more time on Zoom for hearings, depositions, and meetings than you are spending time with your family? Have you become comfortable wearing pajama pants and a nice jacket to Motion Calendar on Zoom? Zoom has become the easiest way to meet with clients, attend hearings, and take depositions. While most of us know the basics, such as screen share and to not appear as a cat avatar, there are a few quirky tricks you should know:

Tip #1: Closed Captioning for Zoom

Do you struggle to hear people on Zoom? The host can enable closed captioning by going to Settings, then Meetings, then In Meeting (Advanced), and it’s called “automated captions.” What if you don’t like “automated captions?” You can turn them off on your own screen after the host has enabled them. Fair warning: they are not 100% accurate. But they’re passable if you want to look at your emails on another screen and keep (somewhat) focused on the Zoom.

Tip #2: Automatically Muting Yourself (or Turning Off Your Camera)

Did you open the Zoom early and worry that that the Zoom meeting will open and you’re in the middle of a conversation that you don’t want your judge or opposing counsel to hear? You can mute yourself in advance! Click on Settings, then Audio, and you should then see a box: “Mute my microphone when joining a meeting.” You can also keep your video off by clicking on Settings, then video, then “Turn off my video when joining a meeting.”

Tip #3: Mute Yourself With the Click of a Spacebar

Did you know you can mute and unmute yourself by simply holding the spacebar? Now you do! No, you cannot hold the spacebar and silence someone else in the Zoom.

A few more of my favorite keyboard shortcuts:

• I to invite. Press Alt+I (Windows) or Cmd+I (Mac) to see the Invite window. You can copy the link to the meeting or send invitations to others via email.
• M to mute. Press Alt+M (Windows) or Cmd+Ctrl+M (Mac) when you are the host and want to mute everyone else in the meeting. (I know a few judges already who know this shortcut).

Tip #4: Try Immersive View!

Tired of looking at everyone in little boxes? A little too Hollywood Squares for you? (Thank you to everyone who understood the reference). Try Immersive View! Click the View button in the top right corner, then Immersive, and try a new virtual background so it looks like you are in the same virtual space as the other participants.

Tip #5: Using PowerPoint as a Virtual Background

Most of us are familiar with Share Screen, but what about PowerPoint as a Virtual Background? Make the most out of your presentation! If the host has enabled Share Screen, then click Share Screen, then Advanced. Double-click PowerPoint as Virtual Background and then select your PowerPoint file. 

Beyond The Case File: Culture, Context, and Compassion in Legal Practice

By Rachel Gonzalez, Esq.

In family law and community-centered legal work, cultural understanding is not a bonus skill, it is foundational. The families we serve do not come to us as blank slates. Every individual arrives at the courthouse steps carrying histories shaped by culture, ethnicity, migration, religion, language, and lived experience. These influences shape how families define roles, resolve conflict, express emotion, and understand authority, parenting, and even justice itself.

When attorneys take the time to understand different cultural dynamics, we move from simply providing legal services to offering meaningful advocacy. A parenting practice that appears unusual through one cultural lens may be deeply rooted in tradition through another. Expressions of grief, discipline, respect, or independence may look different, but difference does not mean dysfunction. Without cultural awareness, legal systems risk misinterpreting families, and worse, harming them.

Respecting cultural context allows us to communicate more effectively, build trust more quickly, and craft solutions that actually work in real life, not just on paper. It helps us avoid imposing our own assumptions, and instead, meet families where they are with dignity and humility. This is especially critical when working with immigrant families, multigenerational households, and communities historically marginalized by legal institutions.

At its core, culturally responsive lawyering is about service. It asks us to listen before judging, to learn before labeling, and to advocate with both skill and humanity more conscientiously. When we honor the full complexity of the families we serve, we do more than practice good law, we practice justice.

Case Law Update

By Ronald Kaufman, B.C.S.

Jhackelin Martinez, Appellant, v. Carlos I. Bustamante, Appellee., No. 3D25-0286, 2026 WL 816936, at *2 (Fla. 3d DCA Mar. 25, 2026).

The Wife, Jhackelin Martinez, and Husband, Carlos I. Bustamante, entered into a premarital agreement before their wedding in October 2020. Martinez filed for divorce in 2022.

The parties stipulated to a partial final judgment of dissolution of marriage in late 2024 leaving unresolved the provision: “[t]he marital domicile shall be occupied by Wife until her death or occupied by Husband until his death.”

The court took parol evidence and ultimately declined to give the disputed provision any effect in the supplemental final judgment, finding the provision was “ambiguous, and clearly was a mistake.” Wife appealed, arguing that parol evidence established the parties’ intention to give her a life estate in the marital domicile.

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed, finding that a court generally can't resolve a “patent ambiguity” in contractual language by examining extrinsic evidence. A patent ambiguity is readily discernible on the face of the instrument, arising from language that is “defective, obscure, or insensible.”

Here, the language is readily discernible as defective - it purports to give both parties the same right to occupy the same property. The language is also insensible because occupying a property generally means to the exclusion of others, presumably, and perhaps especially, including a newly divorced ex-spouse.

The language is therefore patently ambiguous. And the patent ambiguity must be resolved, if possible, by relying on the language of the contract as a whole and canons of construction.

Despite having reviewed parol evidence, the trial court still reached the correct result, and the term therefore cannot be enforced when a patent ambiguity exists in a material term. Additionally, the court noted, the appellate court should affirm a trial court that reaches the right result, but for the wrong reasons.