goal: not uprooting child

[feelhelpless]

Under 61.075(1), Florida Statutes, the Court can award a spouse with majority timesharing exclusive use and possession of a marital residence.

The Court justifies this award as an way of avoiding further disruption to a minor child’s life.

My question is: In your experience, what is the likelyhood of a husband successfully petitioning the court for physical and legal custody and exclusive use of the home, IF the home IS NOT a marital asset, purchased years before marriage ?

Also, what is the likelyhood of it backfiring on the father, and the court awards "exclusive use" to the mother......forcing father to leave his own home ?

[Attorney Howard Iken]

If the house is not a marital asset, it is very unlikely that exclusive use can be awarded to the non-owner spouse.

[feelhelpless]

Thank you, Mr. Iken.

The service you provide here, I want you to know, is invaluable to those who need clarification and a reliable perspective and opinion on whether an issue, given the stated information, in your opinion is worthy of pursuit. (Without requiring a retainer.)

You are a credit to your otherwise much maligned profession.


Given the premise, " ...justifying award of exclusive use as a way of avoiding further disruption to a minor child�s life."

In your experience, have you seen a husband awarded exclusive use and able to prevent the child from being removed from the home in order to maintain the stability of the child's environment ? Does stability & moral fitness of a spouse (adultery) play a significant part in impacting and assessing the "best interest" of the child ?

Or in you opinion, is it a futile effort ?

[Attorney Howard Iken]

Stability is very important. For either gender. Sometimes the entire basis for a parenting decision by the court is based on stability.

Adultery is not so important these days.