Essay playbook
The Contentious Divorce
Work through The Contentious Divorce as a public essay playbook with a fresh Florida-focused fact pattern, scored issues, and a model answer.
On this page
Fact pattern
After 18 years of marriage, Husband (a surgeon earning $500,000/year) and Wife (who left her nursing career 15 years ago to raise children) are divorcing. During the marriage, they acquired: - Marital home worth $800,000 - Husband's retirement account: $600,000 - Wife's inheritance from her mother (kept in separate account): $200,000 - Joint savings: $150,000 They have two children: Emma (16) and Jack (10). Both children wish to live primarily with Wife. Six months before filing for divorce, Husband quit his surgeon position and took a job as a hospital administrator earning $120,000/year. He claims the stress was too much. Wife seeks: 1. Primary time-sharing with children 2. Permanent alimony 3. 60% of marital assets due to her sacrifice of career
Scored issues to spot
Inheritance kept separate is NON-MARITAL. Other assets are marital.
Subject: Family | Points: 10
FL starts at 50/50 but can deviate based on factors including career sacrifice.
Subject: Family | Points: 15
The 2023 reform ELIMINATED permanent alimony. Durational alimony is available instead, but not automatically - entitlement, need and ability to pay must still be established.
Subject: Family | Points: 15
18-year marriage (moderate-term) = 60% term cap, i.e. 10.8 years - and note it is extendable under EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES on clear and convincing evidence that the extension is NECESSARY, after applying §61.08(3) and the additional §61.08(8)(b) factors - so do not state it as an absolute maximum.
Subject: Family | Points: 10
A court may impute income to a voluntarily underemployed spouse at earning capacity, but resolve the stress CLAIM first rather than assuming voluntariness. For CHILD SUPPORT, §61.30(2)(b) bars imputing ADDITIONAL earning capacity (his actual $120K still counts) where the underemployment results from physical or mental incapacity or circumstances beyond the control of the party; ALIMONY runs through the §61.08 ability-to-pay analysis instead, with §61.08(8)(c) borrowing §61.30 only to compute net income.
Subject: Family | Points: 15
Best interest governs - but start from the FL 2023 rule: §61.13(2)(c) creates a REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION that EQUAL time-sharing is in the best interests of the child, rebuttable by a PREPONDERANCE, with the §61.13(3) factors still evaluated. The preference of a child is considered but not controlling, and only where the court finds the child has sufficient intelligence, understanding and experience to express one.
Subject: Family | Points: 10