Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Divorce
Is a pet considered property in a Florida divorce? In short, yes, and the court will award the pet in accordance with the factors listed in Florida Statute Chp. 61.075 which also apply to other property such as vehicles, real estate, etc. What if the pet is an emotional support animal - how does this affect the court’s decision on who gets the pet? This was an issue in the case Kraushaar v. Kraushaar, 3D25-1706 (Fla. 3d DCA October 29, 2025).
The husband in this divorce case alleged that a dog was his certified emotional support animal and thus filed an emergency motion for return of the dog, stating he “‘had a disability’ for which [the dog] ‘provided emotional support to alleviate an effect thereof.’ [. . .] [the husband’s] emergency motion for return of [the dog] explains that ‘[t]he Dog . . . provid[ed] therapeutic comfort for a long-standing anxiety condition.’ The motion attaches and incorporates by reference diagnoses and letters from ‘doctors stating why and the need of Dario as a companion dog.’” The wife requested discovery pertaining to the husband’s medical records and diagnoses, aimed at proving whether or not the dog was an emotional support animal as claimed by the husband. The husband filed a motion for protective order to block the wife’s access to these records, and that motion was granted. The wife filed a petition for writ of certiorari.
The appellate court noted that Fla. Stat. 61.075 allows the court to consider sentimental ties to property, and thus it may be irrelevant whether the dog is actually an emotional support animal. The court held “So if [the husband] seeks to show sentimental interest through [the dog’s] status as an emotional support animal, that could be given its appropriate weight by the court along with all other factors in line with the statutory scheme. And no medical records would be necessary. But here, [the husband] sought to show that [the dog’s] status as an emotional support animal constituted a ‘special need or special circumstance’” as conveyed in the husband’s emergency motion.
The court concluded “To the extent [the husband] sought to utilize [the dog’s] status as an emotional support animal to prove a special need or circumstance tipping equitable distribution in his favor, such discovery of [the husband’s] medical records would be discoverable, but such discovery would nonetheless need to be carefully tailored with appropriate safeguards. At a minimum, the records would need to be subject to in camera review. We therefore grant the petition and quash the order under review.”
Nothing in this article can be taken as legal advice. Application of the law is specific to the facts of each case. Schedule your consultation to discuss how the law may apply to your case.