Joint Brokerage Account, Entireties Home, and a Thin Prenup
Married in 2010; wife filed in March 2025 after a 14-year marriage. In 2018 wife received a $350,000 inheritance and deposited it into a brokerage account titled jointly with husband. Husband contributed $60,000 of marital earnings to the same account, and wife withdrew $90,000 for marital expenses. The account was worth $520,000 at separation in September 2023 and $480,000 on the petition date. Wife also used $200,000 of the inheritance in 2019 as the down payment on the marital home, which the parties took as tenants by the entireties; the mortgage was paid from marital income. The home is worth $750,000 with a $300,000 mortgage. Husband contends the account and home are entirely marital. Wife seeks dollar-for-dollar reimbursement of the inheritance. The parties signed a prenuptial agreement in 2010 that lists no assets and waives alimony; each had independent counsel, but neither exchanged financial affidavits. The only account records are monthly statements.
1. How should the court classify and value the brokerage account? Address tracing, commingling, burden of proof, and the valuation date.
Read the worked answer
Begin with section 61.075(1): the valuation date is the petition date absent an agreement or good cause, so the court should value the account at $480,000, not the $520,000 separation figure. Wife bears the burden of proving a nonmarital component by tracing the inheritance through the account. Because she placed the funds in a joint account, a rebuttable presumption arises that she made a gift to the marital estate; she can rebut it with the statements and testimony showing intent and direct tracing. The $60,000 of marital earnings and the $90,000 marital withdrawal create a marital component. If tracing fails because the funds were commingled, the account is treated as marital. If tracing succeeds, the court should allocate the traceable nonmarital balance and the marital balance, and treat the post-separation decline as marital because the valuation date is filing. Passive growth on the nonmarital portion remains nonmarital; growth attributable to marital labor is marital under section 61.075(6). Husband's claim that the entire account is marital is too broad, and wife's claim to the full $350,000 is also too broad. Written findings are required.
2. How should the $200,000 inheritance used for the jointly titled home be treated?
Read the worked answer
Using inheritance for a home titled as tenants by the entireties is a contribution case, not an automatic reimbursement case. The home is marital property because it was acquired during the marriage and titled jointly; the entireties title raises a gift presumption. Wife is not automatically entitled to a $200,000 credit or lien. Florida courts consider the source of funds as an equitable-distribution factor under section 61.075(1) and may award an unequal distribution to avoid an inequitable result, especially where marital income paid the mortgage. If the parties intended a loan, wife must prove that intent with a writing or clear testimony. The court should value the home at $750,000, allocate the $300,000 mortgage, and then decide whether a credit, an unequal share, or no adjustment is fair. The same tracing principles apply, but joint title makes reimbursement materially harder.
3. What analysis governs the prenuptial agreement's alimony waiver, and what facts matter?
Read the worked answer
Under section 61.079, a prenuptial agreement must be in writing, voluntary, and not unconscionable when enforced; disclosure may be waived in writing. Both parties having counsel is strong evidence of voluntariness, but the absence of financial affidavits and any asset list cuts the other way because wife may not have known husband's finances. The court must determine whether the alimony waiver was knowing and whether enforcement would leave wife a public charge or be unconscionable at the time of enforcement. A 14-year marriage with a likely income disparity makes the waiver vulnerable, but not automatically void. The agreement can be partly enforceable: property terms may stand while the alimony waiver fails. The court should hold an evidentiary hearing on disclosure, understanding, and circumstances at enforcement; the burden is on the party seeking to avoid the agreement.