Category Archives: Family Law

Charges under Section 800.04 in Florida of both lewd or lascivious molestation and lewd or lascivious conduct violate double jeopardy

Law Offices
of
Edward J. Chandler, P.A.
708 East Atlantic Boulevard    Telephone:  (954) 788-1355
Pompano Beach, Fl 33060    Facsimile:  (954) 788-1357

If You Have Been Arrested for a Crime or are being Investigated for A Suspected Criminal Action, you need legal advice and the assistance of an Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer. Call the Law Offices of Edward J. Chandler, P.A. to begin protecting your rights TODAY….Phone (954) 788-1355

Charges under Section 800.04 of both lewd or lascivious molestation and lewd or lascivious conduct violate
double jeopardy.

The Fifth Amendment “protects against multiple punishments for the same offense.” North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 717 (1969), overruled on other grounds by Alabama v. Smith, 490 U.S. 794 (1989).

Because double jeopardy issues involve purely legal determinations, the standard of review is de novo. See Trotter v. State, 825 So. 2d 362, 365 (Fla. 2002). Sections 800.04(5)(a) and 800.04(6)(a) for conduct against the same victim during the  same episode are duplicative and violate double jeopardy.  Section 800.04, Florida Statutes, defines various lewd or lascivious offenses under Florida law. Subsection (5)(a) defines lewd or lascivious molestation, providing in pertinent part as follows: “A person who intentionally touches in a lewd or lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital area, or buttocks, or the clothing covering them, of a person less than 16 years of age, or forces or entices a person under 16 years of age to so touch the perpetrator, commits lewd or lascivious molestation.” § 800.04(5)(a), Fla. Stat. (2004).2 Subsection (6)(a) defines lewd or lascivious conduct, providing that a person who “[i]ntentionally touches a person under 16 years of age in a lewd or lascivious manner … commits lewd or lascivious conduct.” § 800.04(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (2004). State v. Paul, 934 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 2006), receded from in part by Valdes v. State, 3 So. 3d 1067 (Fla. 2009). In Paul, the defendant had touched the victim in the genital area  over the clothing and kissed the victim on the neck while in the living room. For the episode in the living room, the defendant was convicted of lewd and lascivious molestation under section 800.04(5)(a) for touching
the victim’s genitals, and lewd and lascivious conduct under section 800.04(6)(a) for kissing the neck.

In Gordon v. State, as cited in Paul, our supreme court explained: “The prevailing standard for determining the constitutionality of multiple convictions for offenses arising from the same criminal transaction is whether the Legislature ‘intended to authorize separate punishments for the two crimes.’” 780 So. 2d 17, 19 (Fla. 2001), receded from in part by
Valdes (quoting M.P. v. State, 682 So. 2d 79, 81 (Fla. 1996)). If there is no clear “legislative intent to authorize separate punishments for two crimes” then a court employs the use of the Blockburger3 test “to determine whether separate offenses exist.” Id. at 19-20. Finding no clear statement of legislative intent in its review of section 800.04, the
Paul court applied the codified Blockburger analysis set forth in section 775.021. Paul, 934 So. 2d at 1172. Noting that the Blockburger test applies to crimes occurring in only
one criminal transaction or episode, the Paul court explained that the first step is to review whether there was one criminal episode or multiple episodes. Id. In determining whether offenses occurred during a single criminal episode, courts must “look to whether there are multiple victims, whether the offenses occurred in multiple locations, and whether
there has been a temporal break between offenses.” Id. at 1172-73 (citation and internal quotations omitted).

A court must then “apply the Blockburger test to each criminal episode to determine whether multiple punishments are authorized.” Id. at 1173. The Blockburger “same elements” test “prohibits courts from imposing multiple convictions for an act or acts which occur in one criminal episode if each offense does not contain at least one element distinct from the other offenses.” Id. at 1172. Under the “same elements” test, each offense is considered separate “‘if each offense requires proof of an element that the other does not, without regard to the accusatory pleading or the proof adduced at trial.’” Id. at 1173 (quoting § 775.021(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2005)) (emphasis in Paul).

In reference to offenses under sections 800.04(5)(a) and (6)(a), the Paul court explained:  In comparing the elements of sections 800.04(5)(a) and 800.04(6)(a), we hold the same elements test will not permit multiple convictions. Specifically, section 800.04(6)(a)(1) defines “lewd or lascivious conduct” as a n y intentional touching of “a person under 16 years of age in a lewd or lascivious manner,” while section 800.04(5)(a) defines “lewd or or lascivious molestation” as the intentional touching “in a lewd or lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital area, or buttocks, or the clothing covering them, of a person less than 16 years of age, or forces or entices a person under 16 years of age to so touch the perpetrator.” § 800.04, Fla. Stat. (1999).

Any violation of subsection (5)(a),  which prohibits the lewd touching of particular body parts of a person under sixteen years of age, will also violate subsection (6)(a), which simply prohibits any lewd touching of a person under sixteen years of age. Thus, one cannot say “each offense has an element that the other does not.” While subsection (5)(a) has an element that subsection (6)(a) does not, the converse is not true – that (6)(a)(1) has an element (5)(a) does not. Therefore, dual convictions and punishments are not permitted for these violations. Id. at 1173-74 (emphasis in original). The court concluded that Paul could not be convicted of both a violation of section 800.04(5)(a) and section 800.04(6)(a)(1) for the two acts in the living room.

You cannot be convicted of both when the  two charges arose out of one criminal episode, and both acts were performed on one victim in the same location and with practically no temporal separation. S e e Paul. Furthermore, the “same elements” test establishes that  both section 800.04(5)(a) and section 800.04(6)(a) are for conduct in the same criminal episode. Id. at 1173-74. Therefore, his conviction and sentences for both crimes violates double jeopardy.

When dual convictions of the same degree are found to violate double jeopardy, the proper remedy is to “vacate the conviction and sentence on one of those counts.” Binns v. State, 979 So. 2d 439, 442 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

At the Law Office of Edward J. Chandler, P.A., our clients come first. Every client is treated with courtesy and is guaranteed effective representation. Our experience and integrity have earned us a reputation as one of Florida’s premier legal firms.

Attorney Chandler knows the system.  He knows how to win jury trials.  He prides himself on getting a just result for his clients. He believes you deserve a fair outcome. His consistent track record of uncompromising ethics instills confidence and trust.

Since 1991, attorney Edward J. Chandler, Esq. is dedicated to achieving the best outcome for every client. With the Law Office of Edward J. Chandler, P.A. on your side, you will come out on top.

Aggressive and Effective Legal Representation for Divorce, Child Custody and Federal and State Criminal Defense!

Serving Broward, Dade and Palm Beach Counties

“Since 1991 – When Experience Counts” 

“FULL SERVICE LAW FIRM”

Payment Plans Available

FREE INITIAL CONSULTATION

Law Office

of

Edward J. Chandler, P.A.

708 East Atlantic Blvd.

Pompano Beach, Fl 33060


Tel: (954) 788-1355
Fax (954) 788-1357

AGGRESSIVE EXPERIENCED CRIMINAL DEFENSE

Edward J. Chandler, Esq. is a dedicated legal professional well-versed in criminal law since 1991 in the State of Florida and Federal court.  He brings his legal experience to the table to fight for you. This gives the Law Office of Edward J. Chandler, P.A. an edge when dealing with complex legal matters. 

Whether you are looking at 6 months in the county jail or life in prison, you need an experienced trial attorney on your side.

Don’t waste your money on an attorney without
the experience or the courage required to help you get the results you need and deserve for your case. Ask the other guys about how much experience they really have, then give attorney Edward J. Chandler a call
at 954-788-1355. Edward J. Chandler, Esq.  has 20 years experience as a trial attorney and will tell you the truth about what he can (or can not) do to help you.

His goal is to represent his clients, as he would want to be represented, always putting their interests first and diligently working to fully understand and serve their needs. In short, to do whatever it takes for the successful resolution of their cases.

In criminal cases my fees are based on the seriousness of the charges (felony or misdemeanor, prior offenses, etc), where the case stands, and the amount of work and court dates we anticipate. For experience and sound legal counsel, call the professionals at The Law Office of Edward J. Chandler, P.A. today!

Edward J. Chandler, Esq.has been practicing criminal law in Florida since 1991.

No single element is more crucial in creating a successful relationship between a client and a law firm than the quality of the service performed by the professionals involved. “Quality,” of course, is expressed by key characteristics such as knowledge, skill, experience and dedication. In that sense, it is an intangible. An expression of quality is strategic problem solving which takes the form of expert legal counsel and, when necessary, aggressive court action.

The Law Office of Edward J. Chandler, P.A. offers free initial consultations.
He represents those under investigation or arrested for Federal and State crimes and will take your case to trial if necessary.He will file necessary pre-trial motions such as a motion to suppress a search, evidence or statements made in violation of your constitutional rights, and can file a motion to dismiss the charges.

FEES:

  •  In criminal cases my fees are based on the seriousness of the charges (felony or misdemeanor, prior offenses, etc), where the case stands, and the amount of work and court dates we anticipate.I usually charge flat fees, so you won’t have any surprises.
  • I will take credit cards if that makes it easier for you.
  • If you have special circumstances or needs, a payment plan is possible.
  • I work in courts in Broward County, Dade County and Palm Beach County. Fort Lauderdale, Miami and West Palm Beach.

FEDERAL CRIMINAL DEFENSE:Facing federal charges is a stressful experiences, even with one of the best Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys in Florida at your side.

By the time you realize that you are the target of federal criminal investigation, the government has already built a strong case against you. The Feds and its criminal investigative agencies, DEA, FBI, Homeland Security, and the Treasury Department,  have almost unlimited material and human resources to prosecute their cases. Federal prosecutors obtain conviction in more than 95 percent of federal criminal trials!

The U.S. sentencing guidelines, although not mandatory anymore since Booker, are still used in the sentencing process and the guidelines are harsh.  The federal criminal justice system does not usually provide for parole. In most cases, convicted individuals will serve most of their sentences except the last six months in a half way house.. All these issues make defending against federal charges more complex.

I can help and as your attorney who may impact the government’s case by various strategic and legal procedural methods to gain an advantage possibly in a motion for suppression of evidence, and possibly a case dismissal, reduction of charges, or a favorable plea bargain.

I am prepared to take it all the way to trial if necessary.

Your chances of a successful outcome of your case depends on how soon I get involved as your lawyer. You should be represented as soon as you discover that you are under investigation, or as soon as possible after your arrest. If you are a target of grand jury inquiries or federal investigation, I can help. I can handle all federal criminal charges including:

* Federal Drug Crimes
* Firearms Crimes
* Bank Fraud Crimes
* Wire Fraud Crimes
* Accounting Fraud Crimes
* Bankruptcy Fraud
* Embezzlement
* Forgery
* Tax Evasion Crimes
* Insurance Fraud
* Money Laundering Crimes
* Mortgage Fraud Crimes
* Identity Theft Crimes
* Health Care Fraud Crimes
* Mail Fraud Crimes
* False Statements
* Perjury Crimes
* Computer Crimes
* International Extradition
* Federal Sex Crimes, including pornography charges
* Federal Import-Export Crimes
* RICO Crimes

  • Crimes of Violence
  • Theft
  • Criminal Mischief
  • Forgery
  • Identity Theft
  • Vehicular Assault
  • Homicide/Manslaughter
  • Criminal Mischief
  • Arson
  • Kidnapping
    • Traffic violations
    • Suspended License
    • No Valid DL
    • Domestic Violence and Battery
    • Shoplifting
    • Harassment
    • Fighting/Disorderly Conduct
    • Cruelty to Animals
    • Possession of Marijuana/Paraphernalia.
    • Weapons charges
    • Child Pornography

Choosing The Best Criminal Attorney For Your CaseAnyone facing an allegation that they have violated state or federal law needs a strong and knowledgeable criminal defense attorney they can respect and trust. Money, jailtime, and even someone’s life may be on the line and a criminal lawyer has to be trusted to fight hard for his client’s best interests.

Edward Chandler is dedicated to helping people who are facing criminal authorities in arrests, allegations, investigations, trials, or appeals. He is a criminal defense lawyer who wants what is best for each client, and works hard to find a resolution that will most likely help his client to erase the past and begin a new future. Time and again, he has gained dismissals, acquittals and reductions for his clients.

Before deciding on the right criminal defense lawyer for your case, you should talk with the attorney and get a feel for how you will work together. There’s no bond like that between a criminal defense lawyer and his client, and deciding who to hire as your criminal defense attorney may be the most important decision of your life.

Leave a comment

Filed under Attorney, Broward County, Criminal defense, Family Law, Law, Lawyer

Florida Case Law on Asset Distribution in Divorces and Alimony

Florida Case Law on Asset Distribution in Divorces

 Welcome to the …….


Law Offices
of
Edward J. Chandler, P.A.
708 East Atlantic Boulevard    Telephone:  (954) 788-1355
Pompano Beach, Fl 33060    Facsimile:  (954) 788-1357
Call Today! 24/7


Florida Case Law on Asset Distribution in Divorces

Accrued benefits:  “A former spouse is not entitled to receive benefits that accrue after
the dissolution of the parties’ marriage.” Rivero v. Rivero, 963 So. 2d 934, 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). Section 61.075, Florida Statutes (2008), provides that in a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, the court shall
equally distribute the marital assets and liabilities between the parties. The statute defines “marital assets” as “assets acquired … during the marriage, individually b y either spouse or jointly by them.” This
encompasses assets that have been enhanced or appreciated in value “resulting either from the efforts of either party during the marriage or from the contribution to or expenditure thereon of marital funds or other
forms of marital assets, or both.” § 61.075(6)(a)1.a.–b., Fla. Stat. (2008). See also Boyett v. Boyett, 683 So. 2d 1140, 1141 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (holding that it is not permissible for the former wife to benefit from the former husband’s labor after the divorce); Brown v. Minning, 757 So. 2d 628, 630 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (holding that “current law provides that a spouse should not receive benefits accrued after dissolution of the
parties’ marriage”). Section 61.075(7), Florida Statutes (2008), “provides that the date of
filing of the petition for dissolution is generally the latest date for identifying and classifying marital assets, but the court may value marital assets on a date that the court determines is just and equitable.” Leonardis v. Leonardis, 30 So. 3d 568, 571 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (citing § 61.075(6), Fla. Stat. (2006); Byers v. Byers, 910 So. 2d 336, 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)).

Call the Law Offices of Edward J. Chandler, P.A. to begin protecting your rights TODAY….

Phone (954) 788-1355

The information on this Law Firm website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, emails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information on this website is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Note: The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult with an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters, and electronic mail. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. All information herein is subject to Florida Rules of Professional Conduct 4-7.2.

RECENT ALIMONY, IMPUTED INCOME AND EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION CASES AND LAW IN FLORIDA

Welcome to the

Law Offices
of
Edward J. Chandler, P.A.
708 East Atlantic Boulevard    Telephone:  (954) 788-1355
Pompano Beach, Fl 33060    Facsimile:  (954) 788-1357

Attorney Edward J. Chandler has successfully represented numerous clients in dissolution of Marriage cases throughout the State of Florida.  Edward J. Chandler  prides himself on aggressive representation with a personal touch.

In addition to personally handling your case, Edward J. Chandler, Esq. will be available to you during every step of the divorce process. Edward J. Chandler guarantees that you and your case will receive his undivided attention.

Call the Law Offices of Edward J. Chandler, P.A.  at (954) 788-1355  – Your phone consultation is free and completely confidential.

Review of the trial court’s decision:

The appellate court will review a trial court’s equitable distribution of marital assets and
award of alimony for abuse of discretion. Lule v. Lule, 60 So. 3d 567,
569 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Rafanello v. Bode, 21 So. 3d 867, 869 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2009). By statute, a trial court must formulate a complete equitable
distribution: “In any contested dissolution action wherein a stipulation
and agreement has not been entered and filed, any distribution of marital
assets or marital liabilities shall be supported by factual findings in the
judgment or order based on competent substantial evidence with
reference to the factors enumerated in subsection (1).” § 61.075(3), Fla.
Stat. (2009) (emphasis added).

EFFECT OF STIPULATIONS OR AGREEMENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT:

A binding agreement to convey real property from the marital estate to one of the
parties requires a writing signed by the parties, or an explicit bilateral
stipulation on the record before a court reporter. See § 725.01, Fla. Stat. and Farrell v. Farrell, 661 So. 2d 1257, 1259 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).
A joint stipulation must be  “entered and filed” in accordance with section 61.075(3).

Imputed Income:


The standard of review of a court’s decision to impute income is whether it is supported by competent, substantial evidence. Mount v. Mount, 989 So. 2d 1208, 1209 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). A court may impute income where a party is willfully earning less and the party has the capability to earn more by the use of his best efforts. Schram v. Schram, 932 So. 2d 245, 249 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). Zarycki-Weig v. Weig, 25 So. 3d 573, 575 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). In considering imputation of income, “the court must determine whether the subsequent unemployment resulted from the spouse’s pursuit of her own interests or through less than diligent and bona fide efforts to find employment paying income at a level equal to or better than that formerly received.”

Bridge-the-Gap Alimony


“A trial court’s decision on whether to award permanent periodic alimony is subject to an abuse of discretion standard of review.” Hornyak v. Hornyak, 48 So. 3d 858, 861 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); see Mondello v. Torres, 47 So. 3d 389, 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (noting that “the nature and amount of a n award of alimony is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the trial court” (citation, internal quotation marks, and alteration omitted)); § 61.08(2), Fla. Stat. (2009).

In determining a proper award of alimony or maintenance, the court shall consider all relevant economic factors, including but not limited to:
(a) The standard of living established during the marriage.
(b) The duration of the marriage.
(c) The age and the physical and emotional condition of each
party.
(d) The financial resources of each party, the nonmarital and the
marital assets and liabilities distributed to each.
(e) When applicable, the time necessary for either party to acquire
sufficient education or training to enable such party to find
appropriate employment.

(f) The contribution of each party to the marriage, including, but
not limited to, services rendered in homemaking, child care,
education, and career building of the other party.
(g) All sources of income available to either party.

THE NEEDS OF THE SPOUSE:

The needs of the spouse requesting the alimony and the ability of the other spouse to make alimony payments.
Leonardis v. Leonardis, 30 So. 3d 568, 570 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). “The criteria to be used in establishing this need include the parties’ earning ability, age, health, education, the duration of the marriage, the standard of living enjoyed during its course, and the value of the parties’ estates.” Mallard v. Mallard, 771 So. 2d 1138, 1140 (Fla. 2000) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). “The standard-of-living is not a super-factor” over the other considerations. Donoff v. Donoff, 940 So. 2d 1221, 1225 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); see Pirino v. Pirino, 549 So. 2d 219, 220 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (“Indeed, it is the exceptional case when a couple’s resources and earnings prove sufficient to maintain two independent households in the same manner as the original household.”). “[T]he parties’ standard ofliving during the marriage is not a useful guide in awarding alimony where the parties lived beyond their means,” as in this case. Nichols v. Nichols, 907 So. 2d 620, 623 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see § 61.08(2)(a), Fla. Stat.“Clearly the husband cannot be required to maintain the wife’s standard of living when this maintenance stretches beyond his financial capacity.”
Pirino, 549 So. 2d at 220. Alimony is not intended “to fund the enjoyment of every little luxury enjoyed before divorce.” Levine v. Levine, 954 So. 2d 741, 743 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).
The court may consider any other factor necessary to do equity and justice between the parties. § 61.08(2), Fla. Stat.

In contrast to permanent periodic alimony, “[b]ridge-the-gap alimony is designed to ease the transition of a spouse from married to single life.” Hornyak, 48 So. 3d at 862. It “is most appropriately awarded in instances where the receiving spouse is already employed, possesses adequate employment skills, and requires no further rehabilitation other than a brief time to ease the transition to single life.” Cohen v. Cohen, 39 So. 3d 403, 406 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see Wofford v. Wofford, 20 So. 3d 470, 474 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (“Bridge-the-gap alimony serves to assist a spouse already capable of self-support during the transition from being married to being single.”
(citation, internal quotation marks, and alteration omitted)). “Where no rehabilitative plan is presented, a bridge-the-gap award must have a relatively brief durational limit.” Hornyak, 48 So. 3d 862; see Mills v. Mills, 948 So. 2d 885, 886 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (“Bridge-the-gap alimony is to assist a spouse with any legitimate, identifiable, short-term need.” (citation, internal quotation marks, and ellipsis omitted)). The Fifth District Court of Appeal en banc affirmed a twelve-month, bridge-the-gap alimony, where “the former wife ha[d] adequate employment skills and an exemplary employment record” as not being a n abuse of discretion.  Engesser v. Engesser, 42 So. 3d 249, 252 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (en banc). A “[d]isparity in income alone does not justify an award of permanent periodic alimony” and that “[a]n award of permanent alimony is improper where the evidence does not reflect permanent inability on the part of the wife to become self-sustaining.” Rosecan v. Springer, 845 So. 2d 927, 929, 930 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

JEWELRY AS MARITAL ASSETS:

“Marital assets” include “[i]nterspousal gifts during the marriage.” § 61.075(6)(a)1.c., Fla. Stat. (2009); see Ruiz v. Ruiz, 548 So. 2d 699, 699- 700 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing trial court for failing to treat the
uncontroverted purchase of jewelry with marital assets as marital property subject to equitable distribution and citing § 61.075 relating to interspousal gifts as declaratory of Florida law). “Under well-established
statutory and case law, an interspousal gift during the marriage is a marital asset.” Maddox v. Maddox, 750 So. 2d 693, 694 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); cf. Gardner v. Gardner, 452 So. 2d 981, 983-84 (Fla. 5th DCA
1984) (“Separate property of a spouse includes assets of one spouse acquired from a source outside or unconnected with the marriage, such as by inheritance, property owned prior to marriage, or gifts from third
parties.”). Any gift of jewelry from Former Husband to Former Wife bought with marital assets remains a marital asset.

POST PETITION SPENDING: Post-petition spending is not always waste. See Bush v. Bush,
824 So. 2d 293, 294 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (recognizing error to include as part of the equitable distribution scheme a portion of stock options husband had depleted during dissolution proceedings to satisfy couple’s
financial obligations).

Law Offices
of
Edward J. Chandler, P.A.

708 East Atlantic Boulevard    Telephone:  (954) 788-1355
Pompano Beach, Fl 33060    Facsimile:  (954) 788-1357

Welcome to the
Law Offices
of
Edward J. Chandler, P.A.

708 East Atlantic Boulevard    Telephone:  (954) 788-1355
Pompano Beach, Fl 33060    Facsimile:  (954) 788-1357

Attorney Edward J. Chandler has successfully represented numerous clients in dissolution of Marriage cases throughout the State of Florida.  Edward J. Chandler  prides himself on aggressive representation with a personal touch.

In addition to personally handling your case, Edward J. Chandler, Esq. will be available to you during every step of the divorce process. Edward J. Chandler guarantees that you and your case will receive his undivided attention.

Call the Law Offices of Edward J. Chandler, P.A.  at (954) 788-1355  – Your phone consultation is free and completely confidential.

Florida Alimony Types:

Bridge-the-gap Alimony: May be awarded to assist a party by providing support to allow the party to make a transition from being married to being single. Bridge-the-gap alimony is designed to assist a party with legitimate identifiable short-term needs, and the length of an award may not exceed 2 years. An award of bridge-the-gap alimony terminates upon the death of either party or upon the remarriage of the party receiving alimony. An award of bridge-the-gap alimony shall not be modifiable in amount or duration.

Rehabilitative Alimony: Awarded to assist a party in establishing the capacity for self-support through either:

1. The redevelopment of previous skills or credentials; or

2. The acquisition of education, training, or work 113 experience necessary to develop appropriate employment skills or 114 credentials.

A final judgment or order of rehabilitative alimony must have findings of fact showing a “specific and defined rehabilitative plan.”

An award of rehabilitative alimony may be modified or terminated based upon a substantial change in circumstances, upon noncompliance with the rehabilitative plan, or upon completion of the rehabilitative plan.

Durational Alimony: Awarded when permanent periodic alimony is inappropriate. The purpose of durational alimony is to provide a party with economic assistance for a set period of time following a marriage of short or moderate duration.

An award of durational alimony terminates upon the death of either party or upon the remarriage of the party receiving alimony.

The amount of an award of durational alimony may be modified or terminated based upon a substantial change in circumstances.

The length of durational alimony may not be modified absent exceptional circumstances.

The length of durational alimony may not exceed the length of the marriage.

Permanent Alimony: Awarded to provide for the needs and necessities of life as they were established during the marriage of the parties for a party who lacks the financial ability to meet his or her needs and necessities of life following a dissolution of marriage.

Permanent alimony may be awarded following a marriage of long duration, following a marriage of moderate duration if such an award is appropriate upon consideration of the following factors:

An award of permanent alimony terminates upon the death of either party or upon the remarriage of the party receiving alimony.

An award may be modified or terminated based upon a substantial change in circumstances or upon the existence of a supportive relationship.

Professional Organizations:

* Florida Bar since 1991
* Broward County Bar Association
* Association of Trial Lawyers of America -ATLA
* Federal Bar
* Federal Court -Southern and Middle Districts of Florida
* Supreme Court of United States
* 4th District Court of  Appeals
* 11th Circuit Court of Appeals
* United States Tax Court



Welcome to the …….
Law Offices
of
Edward J. Chandler, P.A.
708 East Atlantic Boulevard    Telephone:  (954) 788-1355

The information on this Law Firm website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, emails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information on this website is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Note: The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult with an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters, and electronic mail. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. All information herein is subject to Florida Rules of Professional Conduct 4-7.2.

Leave a comment

Filed under Alimony, Asset Distribution, Child support, Divorce, Family Law, Florida law, Law, Uncategorized