Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Divorce
When a party disputes that an asset acquired during the marriage is marital or jointly-owned property, it is that party’s burden to prove the non-marital nature of the asset. Assets acquired during the marriage are otherwise presumed to be marital despite whose name is titled on the asset. This was an issue in the case Douglas v. Douglas, 4D22-1144 (Fla. 4th DCA June 7, 2023).
The parties disputed the marital or non-marital nature of financial accounts titled in the former wife’s name and five real properties titled solely in the former husband’s name. The court reserved ruling on classification of the former wife’s financial accounts and ruled if the parties could not agree on what portion of the accounts was marital, the former wife was required to hire an actuary to calculate this with the former husband paying half the cost. The real properties owned by the former husband were determined by the court to be marital after the court adopted the former wife’s equitable distribution scheme. A hearing was later held on the former wife’s accounts and the court found one of the disputed accounts to be non-marital. The former husband appealed.
The appellate court reversed on the classification of the husband’s real property as marital. It held “The trial court distributed marital and nonmarital assets by referring to and attaching the wife’s equitable distribution schedule listing assets to the 2016 final judgment. Although the wife’s schedule classified assets and liabilities as marital and nonmarital, the trial court failed to make findings on the record or in writing as to why it found certain properties to be marital and other properties to be nonmarital. Specifically, the trial court failed to make findings as to why the five real properties were determined to be marital. This was error.”
As to the former wife’s accounts, the appellate court held “The trial court found the wife’s five financial accounts were established prior to the marriage, but marital funds were contributed to increase the accounts’ value. The trial court correctly stated a formula for determining what portion of the accounts would be considered marital. And the trial court correctly acknowledged it was the wife’s burden to prove what portions of the accounts were nonmarital. Nonetheless, in the 2016 final judgment, the trial court stated insufficient evidence was presented to determine what portion of each financial account was marital, and permitted the wife to unilaterally present additional evidence if the parties did not reach an agreement. However, the trial court erred in allowing only the wife to present evidence as to the nonmarital portion of the five financial accounts.”
Schedule your meeting with a Miami divorce attorney to understand how to proceed in your case.