Alimony in Florida 61.08

Unless Rick Scott signs SB 668 in the very near future, Florida's alimony laws will continue to be governed by

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0061/Sections/0061.08.html

Paragraph (10)(c) states in entirety:

 "If there is no minor child, alimony payments need not be directed through the depository."

I discussed this with Judge Earpp during a Contempt Hearing.  I said that the statutes said that if there were no minor children, alimony does not have to be directed through the depository.  He said he was aware of that.  Neither of us gave any indication that we were thinking of the statute differently.

I now think that he was thinking that judges do not have to direct alimony payments through the depository.  In my case, Judge Charles J. Roberts did direct alimony payments through the depository.

As a minimum, it was an abuse of discretion for Judge Roberts to award alimony in my case.  His award is not consistent with law.

I thought the legislature was thinking of me when they said alimony does not have to directed through the depository.  Judge Earpp was likely thinking of "the judge" did not have to direct alimony payments through the depository.

I now consider Judge Charles J. Roberts, Jr's directing alimony payments through the depository as just another example of Government Overreach.  In this case, Judicial Overreach.

Govern Scott should do everything he can to prevent more victims in the future.  I believe Govern Scott signing SB 668 into law would be a step in the Right Direction.

Judicial Overreach

Federal:

In a 5-4 decision, the US Supreme Court legislated same sex couples can get married.

State:

In Kaaa vs Kaaa the Florida Supreme Court overruled a state statute.

Local:

In Florida's 18th Circuit, Judge Charles J. Roberts is demonstrating judicial run amok.  His court was described as having an illegal goal by the 5th District Court of Appeals.

Document no. 194 dated July 16, 2015, clearly demonstrates that he is a judicial problem.
His ruling violates several legal tenants and is inconsistent with his remanded instructions.

Fair and Equitable Distributions

Fair and equitable distributions in a no fault divorce should not "punish" anyone.

The law seems concerned about equity between spouses.

The law should not allow such actions as Judge Charles J. Roberts in Florida's 18th Circuit Court has been Ordering in one case, if not all his cases.

Preparing a "Fair and Equitable Distribution of Assets" should be done out of a court room with and by competent people.

Diane Baccus-Horsley and Charles J. Roberts have repeatedly demonstrated lack of the necessary competence.

Fair and Equitable Distribution of Assets in No Fault DOM

Keeping track of interest due in my case is a computational nightmare.  In addition to “normal factors”, my case includes an 8-month “nunc pro tunc”.  This due to Judge Roberts and Diane Baccus-Horsley.  I should not be penalized for their actions and/or inaction.

After rereading my lawyer's closing a couple of times it became apparent to me that a Fair and Equitable Distribution of Assets in a no fault Dissolution of Marriage, cannot include both investment results and interest for the same calendar period.

I would prefer that I pay my former spouse interest on the assets I retained after she filed the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage.  The market has done well enough that my former spouse almost certainly will prefer to share investment results.

Because the Amended Final Judgment only ordered monthly payments for the mortgages, my ex-spouse should pay the entire 1^st mortgage and half the 2^nd and 3^rd mortgages from Rendition.  She should pay interest on the unwarranted alimony payments until repaid.

Early in my case my lawyer told me that the Court was not supposed to create a situation where it was to the benefit of one of the parties for the other party to become “deceased”.  The Court has done that in this case as long as my ex-spouse remains a beneficiary on my Life Insurance policy.  The “narrative” rationale for this was to enable my former spouse to continue paying the (now paid off) mortgage.

My former spouse no longer needs “protection” provided by my life insurance policy.  The typical “narrative” is for the good ole SOB to leave the state under the cover of darkness and leave the poor “stay-at-home” wife to pay all the mortgages.  My case provides strong evidence that any rational male should do that.

I ACTUALLY THOUGHT THAT NO FLORIDA JUDGE WOULD WANT TO SEND THAT MESSAGE. I WAS ACTUALLY ENVISIONING GETTING ATTA BOYS FROM FLORIDA INSTEAD OF THE CONSTANT NEGATIVISM OF BACCUS-HORSLEY.

LAWYERS LIE.  ARITHMETIC DOES NOT.

Legal costs through a final Fair and Equitable distribution of assets should be paid for out of Marital funds in all no fault Dissolution of Marriage proceedings.

Illegal Goals

The appeals court said that the lower court's goal was not allowed by law (aka "illegal")  The judge was new and the case involved two narratives:

1) Stay-at-home wife abandoned by her abusing spouse who left the state.

2)  A white knight, who although ousted from his home in record pollen, continued to pay mortgages of over $4,000 per month.  [His relatives removed him from Florida.]

Which narrative would you believe?

This male was actually expecting something like kudos from the Judge in the state with the worst housing market.

This male has not received any kudos.  He has received apologies from lawyers not involved in the case.  Judge Charles J. Roberts has demonstrated that he can not distinguish fact from fiction.  I hope his performance has improved with experience.  I hope he is better in criminal cases.

I hope to be able to recover some of my losses for my heirs.  I think Diane Baccus-Horsley should be responsible for half of my losses and my partner's enablers should share the other half.

Sheer Stupidity 001

"The Court" is out of touch with reality.  Appellant believed that no alimony could be verified as "needed" until Appellee's real estate assets were identified.  Petitioner had enough income for "the Court" to find that "her" Hilton Head timeshare(s) were non-marital but not enough to pay any legal fees.

Appellee’s Response to Motion to Supplement the Record is viewable at  https://edca.5dca.org/DCADocs/2012/3815/123815_35_05152013_12144153_e.pdf.

The Court ordered the mortgages to be paid out of Appellant’s employer’s 401k until the account was exhausted.  This had the consequence that all the funds used to pay the mortgages were taxed as ordinary income. 

The Appellant paid off the mortgages so that his “income” would not be over $48,000 more than it should be/need be.

The Court’s major concern, as described in the first complete paragraph on page three is:

“The point is that they should equally share in the tax write-off from the payment of the second and third mortgage.  She’s going to pay the first mortgage, so she gets the entire write-off from the payment of the first mortgage.”

The Court did not allow mortgage payments to be made out of required minimum distributions from accounts other than Harris until that account was exhausted.  Not good tax planning.

The Court “found” that the Apellant had income over $9,000 per month.  This included double counting of the required minimum distribution from a pre-marital 403b which should not be included at all.  It also included double counting for Dreyfus IRA.

The payments, as described in the Amended Final Order, generated additional tax liabilities and increased Appellant’s Part B Medicare premium by about $200 per month.  The Court undid the Medicare premium increase by an 8-month “nunc pro tunc”.

One of four issues raised by Appellee is that the Court did not distribute husband's bank account income.  During most of this case, Drefus Liquid Assets did not pay any "interest."  Husband's bank account income is far less than what he lost by maintaining a significant position in readily available cash.

“The Court” was concerned about tax write-offs when it should have been concerned about Petitioner complying with the mandatory disclosure list and filing a credible Financial Affidavitt.  The Court would have seen the wisdom in no alimony and have devoted its attention to developing a fair and equitable distribution of assets.

I want to see the CPA’s findings that Ms. Hodge needs alimony.

(DR)2H

Reversed and Remanded?

Truth:

I. The Trial Court Improperly Calculated the Husband’s Income By Failing to Reduce his Rental income by the Expenses Associated with Upkeep of the Old Dominion Property

II. The Trial Court Improperly Failed to include Investment Income Attributable to the Wife’s Equitable Distribution And Improperly Attributed the Same Income in Determining His Ability to Pay

III. The Trial Court Improperly Awarded Alimony in Excess Of the Wife’s Stated Need

IV. The Tria! Court Improperly Awarded the Wife the Marital Home as Lump Sum Alimony

V. The Trial Court Improperly Calculated the Premarital Portion of the Equity in the Old Dominion Property Contrary to the Supreme Court’s Decision in Kaaa y. Kaaa.

Must Do Something List

1.       Liberalize Drug Policy

2.       Decriminalize marijuana

3.       Decriminalize drugs

4.       Leave definition of marriage to the states

5.       Disband the Fed

6.       Balance the Budget

7.       Impeach Obama

8.       Defund VAWA

9.       Defund/Cancel/Repeal anything else that “sounds good”

10.   Rethink any law/treaty which does not affect US.

The Internet - The End of Localized Completeness

 The Supreme Court of Florida has adopted rules that require “the allegations” be signed and under oath.  A copy of the rule imposing this obligation (3-7.3(c)) may (or may not) be found at the Florida Bar’s web site at www.floridabar.org.

The oath consists of “Under penalty of perjury, I declare that the facts contained in … are, true, correct and complete.”  I wonder what definitions they are using.  My definitions of “true” and “correct” overlap considerably.  As for “complete,” the universe is complete but even it is evolving.  The Courts seem to be stuck in the days of William Blackstone:

“Blackstone had developed a great interest in common law, and in 1753 he began to lecture on that subject. These were the first lectures on English law ever delivered in a university. His listeners were captivated by the lucidity and charm of his style and by the simplicity with which he presented the subject. The latter virtue, however, was attained in part because Blackstone blurred the difficulties and contradictions of English law. He gave the whole subject an air of completeness and mutual interdependence as if it were a uniform logical system, and he suppressed or ignored its archaic aspects and instead acclaimed English law as the embodiment of 18th-century wisdom. He stated his aims in a notice of his lectures dated June 23, 1753:

“It is proposed to lay down a general and comprehensive Plan of the Laws of England; to deduce their History; to enforce and illustrate their leading Rules and fundamental Principles; and to compare them with the Laws of Nature and of other Nations.

“In 1754 Blackstone published Analysis of the Laws of England, a synopsis of his lectures for the guidance of his pupils. In October 1758 he was elected the first holder of a chair (the Vinerian professorship) of common law. His lectures formed the basis of his Commentaries, which were published in four successive volumes between 1765 and 1769.”

For a continuation of the article in Britannica Online see http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/68589/Sir-William-Blackstone/729/Assessment

The terminology is breathtaking:  “an air of completeness and mutual interdependence as if it were a uniform logical system” and he “suppressed or ignored its archaic aspects”.

The 200+-year history of the United States of America hadn’t even gotten started when Blackstone published his four volumes.  The internet is introducing an interdependence that was unimaginable in Blackstone’s day.  Only the web has potential for "completeness."  No single node can be "complete."

In the Florida judicial system “complete” means that no other factors or evidence need be considered.  Such completeness would allow the Judiciary decision making agent/node to act as if they were a closed system.  For applicable definitions of Open System and Closed System, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_and_closed_systems_in_social_science.

The Florida Judicial Systems needs to look closely at feedback loops.  Circuit Court judges in Family Law matters definitely need their findings of fact to be subject to review/correction.  If my personal experience is “typical,” we are in deep trouble.

My personal situation is an example of “The Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions.”  My ex-spouse is an entitled victim in the 47%.  She has two (2) Master’s degrees.  One is basically in getting free help to help her do good/well.  She has a Director of Christian Education (DCE) degree from Emory University.

She has utilized student loans, victim’s support group(s), and extended unemployment.  (Her highest paying job was with Volunteers of America - Florida where she helped Vets with homelessness, alcohol, and drug problems.)  She wants everything to which she is entitled.  She got her second Master’s in Mental Health counseling in 2003.  Doesn’t she owe the current veterans her services at a reasonable price?  She is/was a licensed mental health counselor in Florida.  Would Florida license a person inappropriate for our Vets?

Should I pay alimony to keep her in the extremely comfortable life style to which she wanted to become accustomed?  Her two (2) real doctor brothers could afford her desired lifestyle.  With only a PhD in experimental particle physics, I could not.  My ex-spouse was enabled by various support groups.  If not the Road to Hell, then at least the Road to the Poor House for me is paved with the Good Intentions of many (good intentioned) people.  Judge Charles J. Roberts, 18th Circuit, may be the only one to suffer any negative consequences for his poorly directed good intentions.

 

 

 

FLORIDA LIARS LIST

1.       Diane Baccus-Horsley 321-727-9888

The Forida Way

File a petition for Dissolution of Marriage Florida Family Law Form 12.901(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(3) with the Clerk of the Court.  The following is from the (b)(2) version.

For your case to proceed, you must properly notify your spouse of the petition. If you know where he or she lives, you should use personal service.   If personal service is used, the respondent has 20 days to answer after being served with your petition.

Your case will then generally proceed in one of the following three ways:

DEFAULT... If after 20 days, your spouse has not filed an answer, you may file a Motion for Default,

Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.922(a), with the clerk of court. Then, if you have filed all of the required papers, you may call the clerk, family law intake staff, or judicial assistant to set a final hearing. You must notify your spouse of the hearing by using a Notice of Hearing (General), Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.923, or other appropriate notice of hearing form.

CONTESTED... If the respondent files an answer or an answer and counterpetition, which disagrees with or denies anything in your petition, and you are unable to settle the disputed issues, you should file a Notice for Trial, Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.924, after you have complied with mandatory disclosure and filed all of the required papers. Some circuits may require the completion of mediation before a final hearing may be set. You should contact the clerk, family law intake staff, or judicial assistant for instructions on how to set your case for trial (final hearing). If the respondent files an answer and counterpetition, you should answer the counterpetition within 20 days using an Answer to Counterpetition, Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.903(d).

With this form, you must also file the following:

·         Affidavit of Corroborating Witness, Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.902(i) OR photocopy of current Florida driver’s license, Florida identification card, or voter’s registration card (issue date of copied document must be at least six months before date case is actually filed with the clerk of the circuit court).

·         Marital Settlement Agreement for Dissolution of Marriage with No Dependent or Minor Child(ren), Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.902(f)(2), if you and your spouse have reached an agreement on any or all of the issues.

·         Notice of Social Security Number, Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.902(j).

·         Family Law Financial Affidavit, Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure Form 12.902(b) or (c).  (This must be filed within 45 days of service of the petition on the respondent, if not filed at the time of the petition.)

·         Certificate of Compliance with Mandatory Disclosure, Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure Form 12.932. (This must be filed within 45 days of service of the petition on the respondent, if not filed at the time of the petition, unless you and your spouse have agreed not to exchange these documents.)

Alimony... Alimony may be awarded to a spouse if the judge finds that he or she needs it and that the other spouse has the ability to pay it. If you want alimony, you must request it in writing in the original petition or counterpetition. If you do not request alimony in writing before the final hearing, it is waived (you may not request it later). You may request either permanent alimony, lump sum alimony, or rehabilitative alimony.

Marital/Nonmarital Assets and Liabilities... Florida law requires an equitable distribution of marital assets and marital liabilities. “Equitable” does not necessarily mean “equal.” Many factors, including alimony awards, may lead the court to make an unequal (but still equitable) distribution of assets and liabilities. Nonmarital assets and nonmarital liabilities are those assets and liabilities which the parties agree or the court determines belong to, or are the responsibility of, only one of the parties. If the parties agree or the court finds an asset or liability to be nonmarital, the judge will not consider it when distributing marital assets and liabilities.

Temporary Relief... If you need temporary relief regarding temporary use of assets, temporary responsibility for liabilities, or temporary alimony, you may file a Motion for Temporary Support with No Dependent or Minor Child(ren), Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.947(c).

For more information, see the instructions for that form.

Marital Settlement Agreement... If you and your spouse are able to reach an agreement on any or all of the issues, you should file a Marital Settlement Agreement for Dissolution of Marriage with Property But No Dependent or Minor Child(ren), Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.902(f)(2). Both husband and wife must sign this agreement before a notary public or deputy clerk.

Any issues on which you are unable to agree will be considered contested and settled by the judge at the final hearing.

Final Judgment Form... These family law forms contain a Final Judgment of Dissolution of

Marriage with Property but No Dependent or Minor Child(ren), Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.990(c)(2), which the judge may use if your case is contested. If you and your spouse reach an agreement on all of the issues, the judge may use a Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage with Property but No Dependent or Minor Child(ren) (Uncontested), Florida Supreme Court Approved Family Law Form 12.990(b)(2). You should check with the clerk, family law intake staff, or judicial assistant to see if you need to bring a final judgment with you to the hearing. If so, you should type or print the heading, including the circuit, county, case number, division, and the parties’ names, and leave the rest blank for the judge to complete at your hearing or trial.

Nonlawyer... Remember, a person who is NOT an attorney is called a nonlawyer. If a nonlawyer helps you fill out these forms, that person must give you a copy of a Disclosure from Nonlawyer, Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure Form 12.900 (a), before he or she helps you. A nonlawyer helping you fill out these forms also must put his or her name, address, and telephone number on the bottom of the last page of every form he or she helps you complete.

The latest version of this form is available at http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/forms_rules/901b2.pdf

Mission

This blog is dedicated to promoting truth, justice and The American Way.

(DR)2H