Tag: Property Division Waste

Are TikTok Gifts Divorce Dissipation or Just Good Business

TikTok allows you to make monetary gifts. After one husband made over $300,000 in marital gifts to others on TikTok during his divorce, a court must decide if it is wasteful dissipation or just good business. It is easier than you think to spend and hide marital assets online as one New York trial court discovers.

Tik Tok Divorce

New York State of Mind

Social Media “gifts” allow a social influencer online to earn real money from followers. TikTok revolutionized online content monetization for creators, and now offers an array of over 100 different gifts. For example, an “I Love You” gift is valued at 49 coins and is worth approximately 65¢. On the other end of the spectrum, a “TikTok Universe” gift has a value of 44,999 coins which is worth about $562.

On April 9, 2025, a couple filed for divorce in New York after eight years of marriage. There are three children of the marriage. Most notably, the Husband and Wife are both attorneys licensed to practice law in the State of New York.

At a recent hearing, the Wife asked the court to appoint a guardian ad litem over her Husband, not the children. In New York, a guardian ad litem can be appointed for a litigant if the litigant appears to be in an “apparently chronic irrational and agitated state” resulting in the individual’s inability to effectively litigate their case without assistance.

To prove a guardian was appropriate, she alleged her Husband had become increasingly paranoid, erratic and aggressive on his TikTok “live streams” and was actively dissipating marital assets.

The court heard evidence of the Husband’s recordings on TikTok some of which were filmed right outside the courtroom:

“CJB [the husband] got Court tomorrow. Ain’t no mother fucking judge check me. CJB is vibing right now. Don’t worry about the consequences.”

In his defense, the Husband characterized his TikTok expenditures as investments rather than gifts. He confirmed that he spent at least $300,000.00 on TikTok, approximately $275,000.00 after the divorce was filed: “So, Judge, when it comes to give away money, I don’t — I can’t affirmatively say I have given away money. Have I made — these are marketing and business expenses.”

Florida Dissipation

I’ve written about dissipation of marital assets before. In a divorce proceeding, when distributing the marital assets between spouses, a family court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution based on all relevant factors.

One factor is whether one of the parties intentionally dissipated, wasted, depleted, or destroyed any of the marital assets after the filing of the petition or within two years prior to the filing of the petition.

For an expenditure to be considered dissipation, there must be evidence of intentional misconduct. This means that the spending spouse must have intentionally used marital funds for their own benefit and for a purpose unrelated to the marriage. Simple mismanagement or squandering of an asset, even if the other spouse disapproves, does not constitute dissipation.

It’s up to you New York

In the New York case, the court appointed a guardian ad litem for the Husband as the Wife met the criteria. The Husband was found to have engaged in dishonest conduct. He represented to the court he was represented by legal counsel, and then admitted he had not yet retained counsel.

Additionally, the Husband was in violation of New York’s Automatic Orders by failing to file a statement of net worth. Moreover, the Husband admitted to the judge that he had been spending approximately $275,000.00 on TikTok after the commencement of this action.

The New York decision is available here.

Divorce, Dissipation and an $1,800 Scotch

The dissipation of marital assets in divorce is always something to watch for, especially when the marital asset is a $1,800 bottle of 1976 The Glenrothes Single Cask Single Malt Scotch Whisky. An Ohio court recently had to decide what to do when an expensive bottle of Scotch turned up missing.

Dissipation Divorce

The Shot

If, as they say, ‘all happy families are alike, and each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way’ the case of the missing scotch is proof. In the recent Ohio matter the Mother and Father had been married over twenty years. Together, they raised three children, two now-adult children and one minor child. The Mother, Father, and child lived together in a house located in Blue Ash, Ohio outside of Cincinnati.

Then in April 2022, ongoing marital problems caused the couple to separate, and the Father moved out of their Blue Ash home. Following their separation, the relationship between the parties continued to deteriorate. Father eventually asked for an received a domestic violence injunction against Mother.

During the final hearing in their dissolution of the marriage, among the many claims, the Father argued that the Mother had denied him the opportunity to retrieve his personal items from the Blue Ash home. During the trial, the Father testified he had left behind his family memorabilia, some religious heirlooms, and most importantly, a bottle of 1976 Glenrothes Single Malt Scotch before he had moved out of the marital home.

The Father explained to the court that while he was given a brief opportunity to collect a few of his personal items from the home, the Mother never gave him a sufficient opportunity to meaningfully collect his belongings. He testified the Mother told him that she put the items he had left behind in storage and that he would be able to retrieve them the next time she was in Ohio.

Despite the Mother’s telling him that his personal possessions were in storage, and that he would be able to retrieve them, it was just not so. In fact, the Mother would later testify that she called a trash service and had all of the Father’s personal property (his heirlooms, religious mementos, and of course, the Scotch) destroyed. She also admitted that she did not tell the Father before tossing his personal belongings in the municipal dump.

At the trial, the court ruled that because of the Mother’s destruction of Father’s bottle of 1976 Glenrothes Single Malt Scotch and his other personal effects, she was to pay him $5,000. The Mother appealed.

Florida Dissipation

I’ve written about dissipation of marital assets before. In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, when distributing the marital assets between spouses, a family court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution based on all relevant factors.

Some of the factors to justify an unequal distribution of the property include things like the financial situation the parties, the length of the marriage, whether someone has interrupted their career or an educational opportunity, or how much one spouse contributed to the other’s career or education.

Another important factor is whether one of the parties intentionally dissipated, wasted, depleted, or destroyed any of the marital assets after the filing of the petition or within two years prior to the filing of the petition.

Dissipation of marital assets, such as spending marital funds on extramarital relationships, excessive gambling, and drug use, are examples which happens a lot. Less common is gifting your husband’s $1,800 bottle of scotch whiskey to trash collectors. Misconduct may serve as a basis for assigning the dissipated asset to the spending spouse when calculating equitable distribution.

When considering whether the dissipation of an asset resulted from misconduct, courts look to see if a spouse used marital funds for his or her own benefit and for a purpose unrelated to the marriage at a time when the marriage is undergoing an irreconcilable breakdown. Merely mismanaging or simple squandering of marital assets is not enough. There has to be evidence of intentional dissipation or destruction.

The Chaser

On appeal, the Mother took issue with the court’s $5,000 contempt penalty for having Father’s items destroyed. The appellate court found that the penalty constituted an equitable offset because the Mother had denied Father the opportunity to collect his equitable distribution of household goods and furnishings.

This offset included all “remaining household goods, keepsakes, and furnishings,” which would include the bottle of 1976 Glenrothes Single Malt Scotch.  Accordingly, the appellate court rule the Mother’s claim that the family court failed to include the value of the bottle of scotch in the marital assets was without merit.

The Ohio Court of Appeal opinion is here.

Settling Britain’s Largest Property Division Award

Billionaire Farkhad Akhmedov and his ex-wife Tatiana Akhmedova are settling Britain’s largest property division award of 450 million pounds. He will be paying her around 135 million pounds in cash and other assets to settle. The announcement ends the largest financial dispute that Britain’s divorce courts have ever seen.

International Divorce Rates

From Russia with Love

Tatiana Akhmedova, who is originally from Russia, decided to accept the cash and art settlement, which represents about one-third of the property division award she obtained in 2016. The parties’ settlement agreement ends a very bitter and long-running legal dispute.

The fight for assets has spanned at least nine jurisdictions since a London judge awarded Tatiana some 450 million pounds — amounting to 41% of Farkhad’s assets — in 2016. The Former Wife’s litigation budget in pursuing her settlement was expensive too. According to reports she had to borrow fund from a litigation finance group called Burford Capital Ltd., which stated it will receive $103 million.

“I will burn this moneys rather then will give her”

Farkhad said in a WhatsApp message to his son in March that year.

Florida Property Division

I’ve written about this case in the past along with the subject of property division in Florida many times before. Property division, or equitable distribution as it is called in Florida, is governed by statute and case law.

Generally, courts set apart to each spouse their nonmarital assets and debts, and then distribute the marital assets and debts between the parties.

In dividing the marital assets and debts though, the court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal. However, if there is a justification for an unequal distribution, as in the Akhmedov divorce, the court has the authority.

However, the court must base an unequal distribution on certain factors, including: the contribution to the marriage by each spouse; the economic circumstances of the parties, the duration of the marriage, or any interrupting of personal careers or education.

It has been a long-standing rule in Florida that an unequal distribution of marital assets may be justified to compensate for one spouse’s “intentional dissipation, waste, depletion or destruction of marital assets after filing of the petition….”

Champagne Wishes and Caviar Dreams

The couple met in 1989, marrying four years later and moved to London. The marriage formally ended in late 2014.

A spokesman for her ex-husband Farkhad Akhmedov said:

The intervention in a case over which the English Court should have had no jurisdiction and the involvement of Burford ultimately achieved nothing for Tatiana. Burford and she spent years and millions of pounds on a costly global tour of various jurisdictions in their attempts to seize Luna. Every one of them failed and the yacht remains and will remain in the ownership of Farkhad and the family trusts. Tatiana has ended up with not a penny more than she was offered by her ex-husband six years ago. Farkhad has provided no payment to Burford. Those monies will have to be paid by Tatiana, thus reducing further to her the benefit of a settlement she could have had before the lawyers and financiers got involved.

The Former Wife was awarded a 41.5% share of her ex-husband’s £1 billion-plus fortune in late 2016. But he did not pay and she has spent years in courts in Britain and abroad in a bid to trace and seize his assets.

At one point she hired a team to try to secure her ex-husband’s enormous yacht, Luna, from a Dubai dock, led by former members of the British Special Boat Service – the naval version of the SAS.
Assets separately seized had included the yacht’s private £5million Eurocopter and its £1.5million Torpedo speed boat, customized with a 1965 Ferrari GTO steering wheel. A £40million global express jet had also been taken.

The Luna was sold to Farkhad in 2014 for £225million, has nine decks, space for 52 crew, two helipads, a vast swimming pool and a mini submarine. They are capable of acting as VIP transport and being lifeboats at the same time. Luna also has one of only two multipurpose custom made lifeboat-limousines in the world at a cost of over £2.8m each.

The Daily Mail article is here.

Today’s Property Division

According to People, former Today Show anchor, Matt Lauer, is finalizing his divorce with Annette Roque. The settlement is rumored to involve him paying his wife up to $20 million. The details of the property division however is unknown, but is a reminder that divorce property division laws in Florida recently changed in a big way.

Property Division

Good Morning Property Divisions

According to People, the couple, who wed 20 years ago in 1998, has agreed to share custody of their children. He is rumored to have a lot of guilt and wants to make sure Annette is taken care of.

Reportedly:

They seem happier and their family and friends are thrilled to see they are both moving forward.”

Left unsaid in the article is what happens to the $7 million coop in New York City, the Hamptons beachfront estate he bought for $36 million from actor Richard Gere, his Sag Harbor home, and other properties.

Florida Property Division . . . and Friends

I’ve written about property division before. Property division, or equitable distribution as it is called in Florida, is governed by statute and case law.

Generally, courts set apart to each spouse their non-marital assets and debts, and then distribute the marital assets and debts between the parties.

Marital assets and liabilities include, in part, assets acquired and liabilities incurred during the marriage, individually by either spouse or jointly by them.

Passive Appreciation and Morning Joe

Passive appreciation of a nonmarital asset may also be a marital asset the court must equitably distribute. For example, Lauer bought his upper East Side apartment for roughly $6 million, but has it listed for over $7 million.

In 2010, the Florida Supreme Court held that “passive appreciation of a nonmarital asset … is properly considered a marital asset where marital funds or the efforts of either party contributed to the appreciation.”

The Florida Supreme Court created a formula for courts to use in determining the value of the passive appreciation of nonmarital real property for equitable distribution.

But the formula was flawed because there is no relationship between the amount of marital funds used to pay down a mortgage during a marriage, and the passive appreciation of the property.

Also, the case requires a nonowner spouse to have made contributions to the property as a prerequisite to sharing in the passive appreciation of the property.

Live with Kaaa

Recently, Governor Scott signed a bill to fix the problem. The bill amends our equitable distribution statute and establishes a statutory formula for courts to use.

The new statutory formula does not require the nonowner spouse to have made contributions to the property, and also bars the marital portion of nonmarital real property from exceeding the total net equity of the property on the valuation date in the divorce action.

The People article is available here.

 

Divorce Waste and Property Division

An English ex-husband has ‘come under fire’ after he admitted to burning down his marital home out of anger over his divorce. This sad event raises the issue of waste in divorce, and how courts can order an unequal property division when assets are destroyed.

Divorce Waste

‘Great Balls of Fire’

According to the Mirror, Paul Duffy appeared at Leicester Magistrates’ Court to admit to a charge of arson at his home in England. Emergency services were called to a ferocious blaze at his address in the early hours of Tuesday morning.

The house is almost completely destroyed due to arson. An investigation into the blaze found 27 individual seats of fire, two jerry cans and evidence of flammable substances and petrol.

The fire caused an explosion at the property and the house next door was damaged, although no-one was inside the address. Duffy left, but later returned to the scene, where he gave himself up to police officers and was arrested.

In interview he made a full and frank admission of his role in starting the fire.

Florida Divorce Waste

In Florida divorces, courts distribute the marital assets and liabilities between the parties every day. Judges have to start with the premise that the distribution should be equal. But is there a way ‘to fight fire with fire’ if a spouse destroys marital property?

In Florida, courts are allowed to distribute property unequally if there is a justification for an unequal distribution. I’ve written about this concept of waste, and other aspects of property division before.

One of the relevant factors courts look to is whether one of the parties intentionally dissipated, wasted, depleted, or destroyed any of the marital assets after the filing of the petition or within 2 years prior to the filing of the petition.

There are many examples, besides arson, of spouses dissipating or wasting assets. Other instances of people ‘pouring gasoline on the fire’ include spending money buying a girlfriend jewelry or lingerie, gambling losses, and drug usage.

Some people get ‘fired up’ over their divorce, and would rather lose the money outright than split it with their spouses.  Where this kind of marital misconduct results in a waste of marital assets, it can serve as a basis for unequal division of marital property.

‘Burning down the house’, one of the largest assets in a marriage, would be a good reason to justify an unequal distribution of the property in divorce. It’s Florida’s way of saying: ‘if you play with fire you’re gonna get burnt.’

‘Fire Away’

According to reports in England, the husband had left the area after starting the fire but later returned to the scene, where he gave himself up to police officers and was arrested.

The house was not insured. The house was ruled to be unsafe and had to be demolished later that day. The husband is now facing jail. Clearly, the husband has jumped ‘out of the frying pan into the fire.’

The Mirror article is here.

 

Ocean’s 492 Million: Divorce Fraud

A London court ordered the seizure of a $492 million yacht in Dubai, to enforce one of the largest divorce property divisions in history. The reason for the large payout? The family law judge found that the husband tried to hide his assets.

© A.Savin, Wikimedia Commons

Cruisin’ for a Bruisin’

The British court ruled that Farkhad Akhmedov should transfer ownership of the 380-foot boat MV Luna, currently impounded in a dry dock in Dubai, to his wife, Tatiana Akhmedova. The judge granted the order to uphold his earlier $646 million judgment.

Judge Charles Haddon-Cave said that Akhmedov tried to hide his ownership of the Luna behind a group of companies and moved the ship to Dubai on the belief that it was “well beyond the reach of an English court judgment.”

Fraud and Unequal Distribution

I’ve written about property division in Florida many times before. Property division, or equitable distribution as it is called in Florida, is governed by statute and case law.

Generally, courts set apart to each spouse their nonmarital assets and debts, and then distribute the marital assets and debts between the parties.

In dividing the marital assets and debts though, the court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal. However, if there is a justification for an unequal distribution, as in the Akhmedov divorce, the court has the authority.

However, the court must base an unequal distribution on certain factors, including: the contribution to the marriage by each spouse; the economic circumstances of the parties, the duration of the marriage, or any interrupting of personal careers or education.

It has been a long-standing rule in Florida that an unequal distribution of marital assets may be justified to compensate for one spouse’s “intentional dissipation, waste, depletion or destruction of marital assets after filing of the petition….” For example, hiding your $492m yacht in the Middle East.

High Seas Adventure

In the final days of the divorce, the billionaire changed his ownership of the yacht to another of his companies. The transactions form part of the billionaire’s “continuing campaign to defeat Akhmedova by concealing his assets in a web of offshore companies.

The Luna, which boasts a 20-meter outdoor swimming pool and eight smaller boats, also has a mini-submarine.

Akhmedov said he had supported his wife after their marriage was dissolved in Russia. He blamed cynical lawyers for later filing for divorce in London, and U.K. politics for the court’s decision.

The couple met in 1989, marrying four years later and moved to London where the wife has lived with the children ever since. The marriage ended in late 2014.

Akhmedov, who refused to take part in the U.K. trial and moved back to Russia, has allegedly moved his substantial modern art collection, valued at 90.5 million pounds, to Lichtenstein, his wife said in the court documents in January.

The judge said that they needed to move quickly to enforce the order over the boat. Akhmedov “has over the past 18 months repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to take rapid and multifarious steps to evade enforcement at every turn.”

The Bloomberg article is here.

 

Divorce Auction

Russell Crowe sold dozens of items this past weekend at a Sotheby’s auction to help him fund his divorce from ex-wife Danielle Spencer. The auction appears to have worked better than expected.

The Art of Divorce

Crowe titled the event “The Art of Divorce,” the divorce auction took place in Sydney on his 54th birthday and featured more than 200 items, including movie memorabilia, antique treasures, artwork and a collection of instruments.

A replica Roman chariot from the same movie in which Crowe played the general-turned-gladiator Maximus, thought to be worth up to AU$10,000, was sold for AU$65,000.

Sotheby’s had estimated the sale would bring in up to AU$3.7m (more than $2.8 million in U.S. dollars), but many items sold for more than their original pricing.

Florida Property Division

In Florida, courts distribute marital assets and liabilities between the parties with the premise that the distribution should be equal unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution. Although it may seem like it, equitable distribution is not an auction.

I’ve written about various aspects of property division before, including Russell Crowe’s proposed auction when it was first announced.

Marital assets are properties acquired and debts incurred during the marriage, individually by either spouse or jointly by them.

Marital assets and liabilities also include the enhancement in value and appreciation of non-marital assets resulting either from the efforts of either party during the marriage.

Dissipation and Waste

One of the relevant factors courts look to in property division is whether one of the parties intentionally dissipated, wasted, depleted, or destroyed any of the marital assets after the filing of the petition.

Spouses can dissipate assets by giving away money irresponsibly, spending money on girlfriends, gambling losses, and drug usage. Some people would rather lose the money outright than split it with their spouses.

If the dissipation of an asset resulted from misconduct, the question is whether a spouse used marital funds for his own benefit unrelated to the marriage at a time when the marriage was undergoing an irreconcilable breakdown.

Misconduct is not mismanagement or even a simple squandering of marital assets in a manner of which the other spouse disapproves. There is no report that the Crowe auction was a waste of assets.

Instead, there has to be evidence of the spending spouse’s intentional dissipation or destruction of the asset. Where marital misconduct results in a depletion or dissipation of marital assets, it can serve as a basis for unequal division.

Alternatively, courts can look at the misconduct, and can assign to the spending spouse as part of their equitable distribution, the misconduct losses.

Battle for the Jockstrap?

Among the most popular items at the auction was the breastplate he wore in “Gladiator” when his character Maximus (spoiler alert) bites the dust. The piece sold for $125,000 while matching leather wrist cuffs scored $32,000.

Crowe also sold items from movies like “Master and Commander,” “The Silver Brumby” and “Proof,” though the Royal Navy dress blues from “Master” proved extremely popular, bringing in a $115,000 haul.

One of the more curious items was the leather jockstrap Crowe wore in the 2005 film “Cinderella Man.” The protective piece went for $7,000 to one lucky bidder.

“I put it in the collection as a piece of whimsy and a bit of a gag. Funny enough, it’s garnered a lot of attention,”.

He and Spencer wed in 2003, and news broke of their split in 2012. The divorce is just about finalized, and the ex-couple share two children.

The auction raised money for the A.C.M.F. charity, which provides free music education and instruments to disadvantaged and indigenous children and youth at risk in Sydney.

The New York Times article is here.

 

When Gladiators Divorce

Actor Russell Crowe has filed for divorce, and will auction off his jewelry, mementos and other property. Will selling his assets before the divorce has ended maximize his property division, or will he be eating crow?

Enter the Coliseum

According to Australian news, Sotheby’s Australia will host an auction titled “The Art of Divorce” in which 227 different items from Russell Crowe’s private life will go up for sale.

The auction will take place on April 7, on what would have been his 15th wedding anniversary.

Rare movie memorabilia will be in the auction including:

  • The armor from Gladiator as Maximus will go under the hammer. The armor is expected to fetch $30,000, while a sword used in the film could sell for $4000.
  • A working chariot from the set of Gladiator will sell for between $5000 and $10,000.
  • A 2001 Mercedes, valued between $15,000 and $25,000, is also in the lot, along with two motorcycles that could command top dollar.

According to Crowe:

Divorce has its way of making you really examine the things that are essential in life — and the things that are not

Through the process I had a look around and realized I had a lot of stuff. Career stuff, stuff I’ve collected, and stuff in general. Boxes and boxes of stuff … so in the spirit of moving forward into fresh air, here’s a portion of that collection of stuff.

Although news reports are unclear whether the auction of the assets are planned in cooperation with his soon to be ex-wife, or his own, generally people should be cautious selling property after filing for divorce.

Florida Property Division

In Florida, courts distribute marital assets and liabilities between the parties with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution. I’ve written about various aspects of property division before.

Marital assets are properties acquired and debts incurred during the marriage, individually by either spouse or jointly by them.

Marital assets and liabilities also include the enhancement in value and appreciation of non-marital assets resulting either from the efforts of either party during the marriage.

Dissipation and Waste

One of the relevant factors courts look to in property division is whether one of the parties intentionally dissipated, wasted, depleted, or destroyed any of the marital assets after the filing of the petition.

Spouses can dissipate assets by giving away money irresponsibly, spending money on girlfriends, gambling losses, and drug usage. Some people would rather lose the money outright than split it with their spouses.

If the dissipation of an asset resulted from misconduct, the question is whether a spouse used marital funds for his own benefit unrelated to the marriage at a time when the marriage was undergoing an irreconcilable breakdown.

Misconduct is not mismanagement, or even a simple squandering of marital assets in a manner of which the other spouse disapproves.

Instead, there has to be evidence of the spending spouse’s intentional dissipation or destruction of the asset. Where marital misconduct results in a depletion or dissipation of marital assets, it can serve as a basis for unequal division.

Alternatively, courts can look at the misconduct, and can assign to the spending spouse as part of their equitable distribution, the misconduct losses.

As the Crowe Flies

The Crowes separated in 2012, share two sons, and their divorce should be finalized around the time of the auction.

Just as we collaborate on the upbringing of our kids, it’s easy for us to work together on something like this.

There are a lot of unknowns about Crowe’s planned auction, but he is fully embracing his breakup. Crowe’s been Instagramming and tweeting about the auction, even responding to curious fans.

It’s unclear if the earnings will go toward Crowe’s divorce settlement or a charity. A request for comment from his rep wasn’t immediately returned.

The Australian news article is here.

 

Divorce and Cryptocurrency: A Bit of Bitcoin

Divorces are increasingly dealing with a new kind of asset: Cryptocurrencies. They are volatile and can be difficult to trace. What is a cryptocurrency, why are they so popular, and how are they a part of a property division in divorce?

Bitcoin is a type of cryptocurrency, and they are the latest way to potentially stash money so it can’t be found when it comes to dividing the marital estate.

Due to the supposed anonymity of Bitcoins, it seems practical and logical that people try to hide their cryptocurrencies from their spouses.

Cryptocurrencies are growing in ever larger value, and they are popping up more in divorces as a new class of asset to divide.

The law is familiar with the redistribution of many types of assets, like cash, bank accounts and other investments, but cryptocurrencies may be charting new ground.

Cryptocurrency

Cryptocurrencies are digital currencies not associated with a central government. Bitcoin, the biggest and most well-known, was developed back in 2009.

They are created and controlled by computer programs, or algorithms. Those algorithms lay out how transactions are made and recorded, and how new coins or tokens are found and released.

People and organizations known as “miners” keep records of every transaction, and attempt to solve complex computer problems that, when solved, reward them with new coins.

In effect, users record transactions directly between peers, rather than through banks or other intermediaries. That system is known as a blockchain and the transactions, and even the currencies, are sometimes referred to as “peer-to-peer.”

A major difference between a cryptocurrency and the U.S. Dollar is that, unlike the U.S. Dollar, the total amount that can ever be in circulation is limited. Because the total supply of the currency is restricted, you do not use more coins to pay for goods and services, but less.

Florida Property Division

I’ve written about property division in Florida many times before. Property division, or equitable distribution as it is called in Florida, is governed by statute and case law.

Generally, courts set apart to each spouse their non-marital assets and debts, and then distribute the marital assets and debts between the parties. In dividing the marital assets and debts though, the court must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal.

In Florida, if there is a justification for an unequal distribution, the court can do so, but must base the unequal distribution on certain factors, including: the contribution to the marriage by each spouse; the economic circumstances of the parties, the duration of the marriage, or any interrupting of personal careers or education.

Additionally, courts can consider the intentional dissipation, waste, depletion, or destruction of marital assets after the filing of the petition or within two years prior to the filing of the petition.

A major fight which can take place during mediation is whether a spouse is responsible for the 50 percent drop in value of a cryptocurrency.

Bitcoin Mania

One of the main problems with a cryptocurrency is their high volatility. It is hard to equitably distribute volatile assets which can gain or lose so much value so quickly.

The price of Bitcoin, for instance, the world’s biggest and best-known cryptocurrency, almost halved in value from its peak value in December.

Cryptocurrencies will be a significant feature in a large number of divorces. Although they can be traceable, cryptocurrencies are highly volatile, and they are not going to go away.

The Business Insider article is here.

 

Houses and Spouses

Once you’ve decided to divorce, new decisions need to be made: who is going to move out of the house, and are you going to sell the house – or not. Florida’s property division statute requires distributing the marital property, but is not exactly a how-to guide. This post looks at some options.

Deciding Whether to Sell

To make the decision more difficulty, there’s really no right or wrong answer to whether you should sell or keep a house. Your decision will depend on various factors.

Some of the factors influencing the decision to sell are things like your personality, is the house titled in both of your names, are there children, if so, where are the best schools, and how far away are the two parents’ homes.

Equitable Distribution

I’ve written about houses and property divisions before. In Florida, every divorce proceeding the court has to set apart nonmarital property, and distribute the marital property.

Florida judges always begin with the premise that the property distribution should be equal, unless there is a reason for an unequal distribution based on several factors.

One of the factors the court has to consider is the desirability of keeping the home for the kids or a spouse, if it’s equitable to do so, if it’s in the best interest of the child, and financially feasible.

Delaying the Sale

Some spouses decide to sell, but schedule the sale months or years into the future. This happens when a couple has kids, and both parents agree that the house shouldn’t be sold to preserve the school district or allow for easier timesharing.

There are other problems in a keeping a house in which your name is still on title. In the even that your ex-spouse does not pay the mortgage timely, your own credit will suffer the late notices.

And, if someone invited to your old home is hurt, that person will sue the record title owners for their damages. If your name is on title as an owner, that’s you! Making sure you have decent insurance on the house may be in order.

Selling Now

If you can’t wait for years, and need to sell immediately, there’s a silver lining.

A fresh start and new beginning after a complete division of all of the assets tying you together with your Ex is the best way to go forward for some people.

However, there’s a cost of sale. When you sell your house, you pay a commission, and other expenses, like taxes, title expenses, repairs which can average about 10 percent of the sale price.

Nesting

This is one of those modern ideas that sound so crazy, it just might work. With nesting, the kids live in the house, and the parents take turns living there. The parent not in the home often has an apartment that the divorced couple rent and share the cost of.

The U.S. News and World Report article is here.