(407) 757-2883
Contemplating a divorce? Do you have pets? If you are like many folks, you probably have a strong emotional bond to your furry friend. You probably treat your pet as if he is an important member of your family. You may even give your pet just about the same love and attention as your other children; or perhaps you do not have children, and you view your pet as a substitute for a child.
In either instance, family pets, unfortunately for most, are viewed as personal property to be distributed in a divorce just as the family vehicle or home. In other words, unless the parties come to an agreement on time-sharing for the family pet, Florida courts cannot otherwise fashion a visitation schedule at trial or otherwise. See Bennett v. Bennett 655 So.2d 109 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (holding that the trial court erred when it awarded custody of the family dog to the husband with visitation rights for the wife, since the dog is considered personal property that must be equitably distributed). The reasoning being this case and its progeny stems from the logical proposition that determining time-sharing for a family pet will lead to ongoing enforcement and supervision problems. Florida courts are already inundated with these similar children-related issues. The First District Court of Appeal in Bennett simply stated, “[w]e cannot undertake the same responsibility as to animals.” See id.
Notwithstanding the applicable law on this issue, folks are still welcome to come to an agreement in connection with their divorce, which provides for a visitation schedule and cost sharing provisions for the family pet. In many cases, the family pet is not given to either party; rather, the family pet will travel with the children from one parent’s home to other operating under the same time-sharing schedule as the children. This often serves as an emotional benefit for the children, and it is encouraged by Family Law practitioners on that basis alone. The pet can be a constant staple in the child’s time during transitions from one home to the other.
That being said, if an agreement cannot be reached, then this issue will proceed to trial for the lower court to decide, and the metaphor of the Judgment of Solomon may or may not ensue. Unlike King Solomon, however, the Court is only permitted to determine i) whether the pet was acquired during the marriage thereby making the pet a marital asset, ii) the value of the pet; and iii) the person to whom the pet should be distributed. The second prong is interesting because “pet lovers” could not likely stipulate or testify to a particular value since he or she is apt to believe that their pet is priceless. Priceless is certainly a hard value to argue, however, when this number is attributed to your side of the column in the divorce.
Nevertheless, if you are in the midst of a divorce, or facing one in the imminent future, it is wise to use your best efforts to negotiate this matter outside of the court system. Just like a parent with children, you know what is best and can be more creative in your resolution than a judge may be at a trial. Settlement is the best option. It is within that venue that you will be able to achieve the best result for you, your family, and most importantly, your pet.