In making a division of property and assets in a divorce proceeding, who gets to keep the property that they inherited?
In awarding a division of property and assets, a divorce court cannot order a service member to designate a life insurance beneficiary. In Hirsch v. Hirsch the Florida Court of Appeal recently stated: "[T]he Former Husband, appeals a Final judgment dissolving his marriage to...the Former Wife...During trial, the Former Husband testified briefly that he maintains a group life insurance policy acquired through his military service in the Army Reserve. He testified that at the time of trial he had named as the policy's beneficiaries his children, his parents, and his fiancée.
A motion for an interim division of property and assets must be sworn and should describe the assets to be partially distributed. The Court's Order should identify which assets are marital and which assets are nonmarital. In Austin v. Austin the Florida Court of Appeal recently stated: "Section 61.075(5), Florida Statutes (2011), does not authorize the trial court's action here, contrary to the wife's urging. This section provides in pertinent part as follows:
For the division of property and assets in a divorce proceeding, gross receipts are an insufficient basis for the valuation of a corporation. In a recent case styled Mansour v. Mansour, the Florida Court of Appeals stated that: "At the hearing on the contempt motion, all agreed that Mr. Mansour did not receive proper notice. Nevertheless, the trial court proceeded and found Mr. Mansour in indirect civil contempt. It also set a purge amount without imposing a coercive sanction that the purge would remove. The trial court ordered Mr. Mansour to pay $25,000 within four weeks. It made no finding as to notice, either orally or in the written order, as rule 12.615(c) requires.
In the division of property and assets in a divorce proceeding; when marital misconduct results in the dissipation of marital assets, the court can award an unequal distribution of marital assets or may assign the depleted portion of an asset to the dissipating spouse. In Lopez v. Lopez, the Florida Court of Appeal stated that: "As a general proposition, it is error to include assets in an equitable distribution scheme that have been diminished or dissipated during the dissolution proceedings.
In effectuating a division of property and assets in a divorce proceeding in Florida, enterprise goodwill represents the tendency of customers to return to a business regardless of the reputation of a person who works at the business. Personal goodwill is attributable to the reputation and continued participation of an individual who works at the business. The Florida Court of Appeals recently addressed this issue in Schmidt v. Schmidt.