keyboard_arrow_up
School
Keiser University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
PLA 2800
Subject
Law
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
Pages
5
Uploaded by DeanTurtle1649
M
EMORANDUM
OF
L
AW
To: Attorneys representing Alicia Jackson
From: Attorneys representing Tobias Tucker
Re: Tobias Tucker
Date: 01/28/2024
S
TATEMENT
OF
F
ACTS
Alicia Jackson became the founder of Things By Alicia twelve years ago, getting married to Tobias Tucker two years later. Over the course of the decade in which Jackson and Tucker were wed, Jackson's modest business blossomed with unlimited potential as she is now earning around
$280,000 annually. An agreement was made between Tucker and Jackson as to who was going to stay home in the event that they have children- Tucker was chosen so he gave up his job in computer sales, earning around $85,000 annually. Tucker was awarded as the homemaker and primary caretaker as Jackson was always at work; the couple now seeks a dissolution of marriage
under the premise that they've simply grown apart.
I
SSUE
S
TATEMENT
Is Tobias Tucker owed restitution and temporary alimony payments and equitable distribution of Things By Alicia from Alicia Jackson on the notion that her business was able to grow considerably due to the time and effort Tucker spent at home, raising their children?
S
HORT
A
NSWER
Yes, Tucker is owed equitable distribution from Things By Alicia as well as restitution and temporary alimony payments from Jackson. D
ISCUSSION
In accordance to the definition provided for FLA. §661, otherwise known as reimbursement (restitution) alimony, "...the obligor spouse agrees to contribute to the marriage by pursuing a career, while the recipient spouse agrees to contribute to the marriage by foregoing possible career pursuits to care for or support the home and family..." While Jackson became the breadwinner for the family, it would only be fair that Tucker be awarded restitution alimony for giving up his entire career in computer sales to stay at home and raise their children. Similarly, in
the case of Rowl v. Rowl
, defendant gave up her previous career to become the primary caregiver
while plaintiff pursued a higher education and increased his earning capacity. Rowl v. Rowl
, 864 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004). The court ruled in favor of the defendant receiving rehabilitative alimony due to her inability to now find employment after having little to no experience, and not working for so long. Id. Additionally, a request for temporary alimony should be considered as fair given that Tucker will now need to either go back to his career in computer sales or find another field of employment entirely so he is able to provide a stable environment for himself and his daughters. See FLA. §810 So. 2d 1, pertinent to income for his daughters and other financial responsibilities. Listed below are individual and joint assets:
Jackson's individual assets are as follows:
1.
1977 Mustang GT500 (valued at $19,500)
2.
Heirloom diamond necklace (valued at $9,000)
Tucker’s individual assets are as follows:
1.
2002 Harley Davidson (valued at $33,000)
2.
Inherited vintage guitar (valued at $4,500)
Assets acquired throughout the marriage:
1.
Marital home (valued at $650,000; outstanding mortgage of $225,000)
2.
7-year-old minivan (valued at $23,000; paid off)
3.
Joint savings account ($19,000)
4.
2009 Sea Ray boat (valued at $16,500; paid off)
Debt acquired by Alicia: ●
$150 monthly (school loans; duration of ten more years)
Tucker and Jackson have agreed to split child custody 50/50 however, the topic of child support may later be revisited depending upon Tucker’s ability to find a well-paying career. Tucker is willing to let Jackson keep her 1977 Mustang and heirloom necklace, and he would keep his 2002 Harley and inherited classic guitar, with respect to FLA. §61.075. Given that the marital home was purchased during their union, Tucker would ask for sole residence here over the course of the finalization of their divorce on the basis that Jackson has the means to live elsewhere. For insight, see the case of de Gutierrez v. Gutierrez
. Appellant was seeking
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
temporary alimony as well as domicile over their marital residence that still had an active mortgage. The court granted both temporary alimony and residency to the plaintiff in their marital home, on the condition that the defendant pay the mortgage monthly because the appellant was unable to support herself since she took the role of caring for their home while he was the sole breadwinner. de Gutierrez v. Gutierrez
, 19 So. 3d 1110, 1111 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009). In a similar respect, after Jackson and Tucker’s divorce is final, Tucker is willing to split the sale of the marital home ($325,000 before taxes) and pay half of the outstanding mortgage, being $112,500. In regards to Things By Alicia, Tucker should be awarded at least 40% of Jackson’s business because it could be argued that without him giving up his career and salary, Things By Alicia would not be where it is today due to the high costs of child care, as well as time spent away from the children. Take note of the case Alpha v. Alpha
. Defendant made an agreement to give up her original career choice in order to help her husband achieve his dream of
establishing his own insurance agency. Alpha v. Alpha
, 885 So. 2d 1023, 1034 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004). The court ruled in favor of the defendant, awarding her half of plaintiff’s insurance company. Tucker is willing to let Jackson have the minivan, on the condition that he alone acquires the Sea Ray. The savings account will be distributed to Tucker and Jackson equally; $9,500 per spouse. C
ONCLUSION
With respect to all of the elements set forth in all of the presented Florida Statutes and cases, it is
most likely that the court will find Tucker’s demands both reasonable and logical. The evidence set forth in this argument is both attractive, compelling, and accurate for the court to make its judgment. It is most likely that the court will rule in favor of Tucker receiving temporary and
reimbursement alimony, as well as the assets listed and a portion of Jackson’s company, Things By Alicia.