How Can I Challenge My Florida Divorce Settlement After It Is Approved by the Judge?
Although divorce is often associated with lengthy and acrimonious litigation, in reality most Florida marriages end through a negotiated settlement agreement between the parties. The final divorce proceedings are then uncontested with the judge approving the marital settlement agreement. But what happens if one spouse believes they were treated unfairly during the settlement negotiations? Can they challenge the settlement after the judge has already granted a final judgment of divorce?
Florida Appeals Court Abandons Prior Rule in Considering Post-Divorce Challenge
The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal recently addressed this issue in a case, Martin v. Slater, which could potentially affect the state of the law in Florida moving forward. The former husband and former wife in this case separated following a 28-year marriage. Shortly before initiating divorce proceedings, the parties voluntarily agreed to third-party mediation, which resulted in a marital settlement agreement (MSA). After signing the MSA, the former wife filed an uncontested petition for divorce, which the court granted. The final divorce order incorporated the terms of the MSA.
Nine months later, however, the former wife filed a motion to set aside the MSA. She now claimed that the agreement was “patently unfair on its face” and that the former husband “provided misinformation” during the mediation process. The trial court denied the former wife’s motion, prompting her appeal to the Fifth District.
The Fifth District affirmed the denial. But its reasons for doing so are what makes this case notable. The trial judge relied on a 1987 Florida Supreme Court decision, Casto v. Casto, in considering and denying the former wife’s petition. Casto involved a married couple that signed a postnuptial agreement about a year before either party contemplated divorce. The Casto decision subsequently established the legal standards courts should use in similar cases involving similar postnuptial agreements.
Fourteen years later, the Supreme Court held in another case that Casto did not apply to a post-judgment challenge of a MSA. Instead, Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.540 governed such challenges. This is important, because Rule 12.540 does not allow a party to challenge an MSA because of “unfairness or unreasonableness,” only when there is alleged “fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct.” But under Casto, a court can consider if a postnuptial agreement makes “unfair or unreasonable” provisions in favor of one spouse.
In the Martin case, however, the trial court said Casto still applied because of a 2004 Fifth District decision, Suppa v. Suppa, which held “Casto analysis applied to a post-judgment challenge to a marital settlement agreement reached by parties” in contemplation of imminent divorce. But after reconsidering that position in the Martin appeal, the Fifth District decided to abandon its prior holding in Suppa. The Fifth District now concluded that Rule 12.540 applied to any post-divorce challenge to a MSA. Unfortunately for the former wife, even under that standard her challenge to the MSA still failed due to “insufficient evidence” of fraud, deceit, or similar misconduct by the former husband.
Contact a Port St. Lucie Dissolution of Marriage Lawyer Today
The Fifth District’s Martin decision may lead to further review by the Florida Supreme Court. This illustrates how divorce law in Florida is both complex and subject to change. So if you are contemplating divorce and need legal advice from a qualified Port St. Lucie dissolution of marriage attorney, contact Baginski Brandt & Brandt today at 772-466-0707 to schedule a confidential consultation.
Source:
scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5942187794740881383
