Smith Family Law Firm Blog

This blog provides brief summaries of the most recent family law appellate cases and statutes that may effect the issues our existing and prospective clients are facing. This is not an exhaustive list and do not automatically assume that if a case seems similar to your facts that the same result will be reached. We encourage individuals to secure counsel. These are very difficult issues to go through alone.

Smith Family Law Firm Update: Week of October 9, 2017

Posted by Roy Smith on Oct 13th 2017

Dukes v. Griffin: 1st DCA, October 11, 2017:
While districts have required trial courts to set forth specific steps and requirements by which a parent can restore reduced time-sharing and eliminate time-sharing restrictions the 1st DCA finds no statutory basis for such a requirement.

Brock v. Brock: 1st DCA, October 11, 2017:
A trial court's adoption of a party's proposed final judgment is not evidence that it resulted in a substitute for the court's thoughtful and independent analysis of the facts, issues, and law.

Betts v. Betts: 2nd DCA, October 13, 2017:
A dollar-for-dollar equitable credit to the former husband for the contributions he made to the mortgage of a martial property was improper as when marital assets are used during the marriage to reduce the mortgage on property, the increase in equity is a martial asset subject o equitable distribution.

Goodman v. Goodman: 2nd DCA, October 13, 2017:
Trial court erred in failing to make findings that supported its treatment of stock options awarded to Husband as a source of income and marital assets (if a trial court treats a stock option as an asset it cannot also treat the same option as income for calculating child support). The trial court also failed to include wife;s trust income as income for child support purposes,

Broga v. Broga: 1st DCA, October 11, 2017:
Trial court improperly imputed income to Husband where no evidence was shown that he could actually earn said income. As the award of attorneys fees was based on the same faulty calculation, the issue was also remanded for further determination by court.


Smith Family Law Update: Week of October 2, 2017

Posted by Roy Smith on Oct 09th 2017

Perkins v. Simmonds: 4th DCA, October 4, 2017: The presumption of paternity to the husband of the mother is not absolute. In this case it was uncontested that putative father was the father, the child was given the putative father's last name, mother had represented she was getting a divorce when she had the child, putative father financially supported the child, and putative father had a strong parent/child bond with the child. Therefore the trial court erred in granting mother's motion to dismiss simply because she was in an intact marriage at the time of the birth of the child.

Schroll v. Schroll: 1st DCA, October 6, 2017: A trial court may award a nominal award of permanent alimony to a spouse who has a clear need for permanent alimony but the other spouse does not have a current ability to pay. However, in this case the trial court awarded wife $1,200,000 in assets and originally held that alimony was not necessary. On rehearing the trial court awarded the nominal alimony without an explanation. Therefore, the issue of nominal permanent periodic alimony was remanded for further explanation. Trial court erred in valuing certain accounts as of date of filing as evidence showed the husband had utilized the accounts to pay for marital expenses during the dissolution including living expenses, attorney's fees and costs, new vehicles for both parties, moving expenses, and paying off the mortgage on the former marital residence before it sold. Issue of valuation of retirement accounts was remanded for explanation as to why valuation of said accounts was tied to date of filing when evidence showed that the accounts had fallen significantly in value based on passive market factors.

Frost v. Frost: 1st DCA, October 6, 2017: Former Wife did not preserve the issue of whether the trial court abused its discretion by not setting forth the steps the former wife must take to restore unsupervised visitation with the minor child. Former wife could have filed a motion for rehearing but she failed to do so nor did she take any other steps to address the issue.


Roy J. Smith IV, Super Lawyers Announcement

Posted by Roy Smith on Jun 08th 2017

Family attorney, Roy J. Smith, IV, has been selected for inclusion on this year’s Super Lawyers 2017. This marks his eighth year in a row to be listed by Super Lawyers.

Family Law in Florida

Family law differs between federal and state levels and regulations can be complex. This area of law includes alimony, divorce, child custody and support, domestic violence, parenting plans, etc. These laws can also vary from state to state. An experienced attorney with extensive knowledge of family law can ensure your family and legal rights are protected.

The rating system for Super Lawyers combines peer nominations, peer evaluations and independent research evaluations broken down by practice area. No more than five percent of the attorneys in Florida are selected for the Super Lawyers list each year.

Family Law Firm in Altamonte Springs, FL

Super Lawyers provides an easy way to attain a local family law attorney. View Roy J. Smith, IV's attorney profile HERE.