Florida Court Addresses Sale of Marital Home 17 Years After Divorce

Division of assets is often one of the more complex aspects of a Florida divorce case. Even when the parties are willing and able to reach a negotiated settlement on how to split their property, there are still a number of details that need to be worked out. This is particularly true when it comes to the marital home.

Ex-Spouses Still Required to Share Non-Mortgage Home Expenses

A recent decision from the Florida First District Court of Appeal, Lantz v. Gibson, offers a cautionary tale of what can go wrong when a couple tries to draft their own divorce agreement and overlooks some of these critical details with respect to their house. The former husband and former wife in this case purchased their marital home in 2005. Two years later, they divorced.

The parties negotiated their own marital settlement agreement (MSA), which the court approved as part of the final divorce judgment. With respect to the marital home, the MSA said the parties “will split gains 60% wife and 40% husband.” The wife further agreed she would be solely responsible for any mortgage payments going forward.

The former wife initially planned to sell the home, but due to the 2008 economic downturn the mortgage was now “underwater,” so instead she started renting the property. This continued for the next 17 years. During this period, the former husband made no financial contributions to the property’s upkeep, and the former wife did not share any of the rent she received.

At one point, in 2021, the parties did find a buyer for the house. This would have resulted in the 60/40 split of sale proceeds contemplated in the MSA. But the former wife refused to close on the sale, because she claimed she was entitled to a greater share of the sale proceeds to account for the former husband’s share of the home expenses since 2005. This led to further litigation.

The First District ultimately held that the former wife was entitled to some relief. It explained that under Florida real property law, once the divorce became final, the parties now co-owned the house as “tenants in common.” This meant they were each “equally obligated to contribute all costs necessary to maintain their ownership of the property,” unless the parties agreed otherwise. Here, the MSA only obligated the former wife to assume full responsibility for the mortgage payments. It was silent as to other expenses related to the house. As such, the former wife was entitled to a credit from the proceeds of the sale to account for the former husband’s share of the non-mortgage home expenses.

Contact a Port St. Lucie Division of Assets Lawyer Today

Dividing your marital assets is not simply a matter of drawing a line down the middle. There are a number of issues and details you need to consider. An experienced Port St. Lucie division of assets attorney can guide you through this process and help to ensure there is no confusion as to the final terms of your settlement. Contact Baginski Brandt & Brandt today at 772-466-0707 to schedule a confidential consultation.

Source:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4748241582788840852