Appeals Court Reviews Equitable Distribution Scheme for Abuse of Discretion

When dividing the marital estate, the trial court must make findings of fact that support their reasoning for dividing the marital estate in the manner they do. In the case of Gayer v. Nicita, the former husband filed an appeal raising concerns about how the marital estate was divided by the court. One point of contention was a $6,000 tax credit allotted to the wife.

In 2015, the former husband cashed out his Florida Retirement System plan and deposited the money into an IRA. Later that year, the former husband withdrew the funds from the IRA. Because he was less than 59.5 years old at the time he withdrew the funds, he incurred taxes and an IRS penalty. In its equitable distribution scheme, the trial court granted the former wife a $6,000 credit for payment of a portion of the IRS tax liability owed by the former husband. In other words, because the liability was incurred during the marriage, it remained the property of the marital estate.

The appeals court reviewed the determination for an abuse of discretion. The distribution of marital assets and liabilities must be supported by factual findings in the judgment based on competent substantial evidence. In this case, the trial court’s granting of the tax credit to the former wife was not supported by any factual findings nor was it based on competent substantial evidence.

The final judgment stated that “the Court values the Wife’s contributions toward the tax due at $6,000.” However, neither the trial court’s final judgment nor its oral ruling at trial included any finding that the former wife paid any amount toward the tax liability. There was no evidence in the record to support such a finding.

At trial, the former wife testified that at the time the former husband made the withdrawals, he did not pay any taxes or penalties incurred. This left the former wife stuck with the debt when it came time to file tax returns. However, the former wife did not provide any testimony indicating that she actually paid toward the tax liability incurred from the early withdrawals.

The trial court obtained the figure of $6,000 from the former wife’s equitable distribution spreadsheet. However, the spreadsheet was admitted only as a demonstrative aid and not as evidence.

Because the trial court’s grant of the $6,000 credit to the former wife was not supported by any factual findings or based on competent substantial evidence, the appeals court reversed the decision to grant the wife that sum and removed the $6,000 credit.

Talk to a Tampa, FL Family Law Attorney Today 

Westchase Law, P.A. represents the interests of Tampa residents who are pursuing a divorce. For more information on how we can help you resolve key issues such as equitable distribution of the marital estate, alimony, child support, or child custody, call our Tampa family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your goals right away.

Source:

casetext.com/case/gayer-v-nicita?q=dissolution%20of%20marriage%202023&sort=relevance&p=1&type=case&jxs=fl