Can Infidelity or Adultery Affect Alimony Awards in Florida?

Questions about how infidelity affects divorce outcomes come up all the time. Many people assume that because Florida is a no-fault divorce state, adultery has no legal effect. That is not entirely correct. Florida law now expressly permits judges to consider adultery if it had an economic impact on the marriage when deciding whether to award alimony and, if so, how much. Understanding how the statute works, what courts will actually look for, and how to prove financial harm can make a decisive difference in a divorce case. The lawyers at Adams, Luka, & Benton P.A. explain how adultery can play a role in alimony decisions, what kinds of evidence matter, and the practical steps you can take to protect your financial interests.

Florida’s alimony statute was substantially revised in recent years. The current version of section 61.08 allows a court to consider the adultery of either spouse and any resulting economic impact in determining the amount of alimony, if any, to be awarded. The statute also requires the court to make written findings of fact to support its decision about whether to award alimony, what type to award, and how long any obligation should last. These written findings create a clear record for appeal and ensure that the court has considered the statutory factors in reaching its conclusion.

Recent legislative reforms consolidated in SB 1416 clarified and expanded several points. Among other things, the law made clear that courts may weigh the economic effect of adultery when deciding an alimony award. The law also established that the party seeking alimony has the burden of proving both a need for support and the other party’s ability to pay. These changes are important because they alter both what a judge may consider and who must shoulder the initial factual burden in alimony disputes. The reforms took effect for petitions filed after the statutory effective date and apply differently to pending and older cases depending on timing and preservation of rights.

It is also important to understand the relationship between alimony and property division. Florida’s equitable distribution rules allow courts to address intentional dissipation, waste, or depletion of marital assets when dividing property. If marital funds were used to support an affair, a judge may compensate the nonoffending spouse in the property division phase by awarding a larger share of remaining assets. That same evidence of dissipation can inform alimony decisions if spending on an affair affected the financial resources available to the marriage.

The statute is permissive. Simply put, a judge may consider adultery, but the relevance and weight of that conduct depend on whether it had measurable financial consequences for the family. Adultery without an economic component generally does not change the alimony analysis. Courts expect to see evidence that marital assets were wasted or that the adulterous spouse diverted income or property to the extramarital partner. When an affair is accompanied by lavish spending on gifts, travel, housing, or other expenditures that depleted marital resources, judges will consider that conduct when fashioning alimony and property division.

There are two main routes by which adultery can affect the bottom line in a divorce. One route is equitable distribution. If one spouse used marital funds to support an affair, the court may treat those expenditures as dissipation and adjust the division of assets to compensate the innocent spouse. The other route is alimony. If the adulterous conduct left the family with fewer resources and the nonoffending spouse has greater need, a court may award or increase alimony to help restore economic fairness. Conversely, if the adulterous spouse’s financial behavior shows a reduced ability or willingness to pay support, a court may factor that into calculations. The core point is that evidence of economic harm drives the legal impact.

Proving that an affair affected the family’s finances requires concrete evidence. Courts do not base equitable distribution or alimony adjustments on accusations alone. The types of economic misconduct judges pay attention to include undocumented or extravagant spending on gifts, hotel stays, restaurant bills, airline and hotel reservations, cash transfers, rent or mortgage payments for the third party, direct payments for the third party’s living expenses, unexplained withdrawals, new debts run up during the affair, and purchases inconsistent with the family’s ordinary budget. A pattern of withdrawals or charges that cannot be justified by household needs often suggests dissipation.

Useful forms of evidence include bank records, credit card statements, wire transfer histories, cancelled checks, receipts, proof of hotel charges, travel itineraries, dates on transactional records, sworn witness statements, emails and text messages, GPS or location data when available, and social media posts that corroborate suspicious spending. Forensic accounting can be especially valuable in tracing where money went and in quantifying losses. Judges will generally expect precise accounting when a party asks for an adjustment based on dissipation. Courts are less receptive to vague claims of misconduct without paper trails or direct proof.

The courts have repeatedly said that adultery alone, without a showing of related depletion of marital assets, will not justify unequal division or a different alimony outcome. In other words, moral fault matters less than financial effect. Appellate decisions across Florida underscore that point. Courts will analyze whether marital funds were intentionally wasted or diverted and whether the innocent spouse is entitled to compensation through equitable distribution or alimony adjustments. Rabbath v. Farid 273 So. 3d 221(2019) was overturned on appeal and is a frequently cited example where the court recognized that spending on an adulterous relationship can constitute dissipation of marital assets, and the trial court’s findings about dissipation can alter the division. But appellate courts also reverse trial courts that rely on adultery where there is no demonstrable financial loss tied to the affair. The law therefore requires both proof and careful judicial findings.

Under the revised statute, the party seeking alimony carries the burden of proving need and the other party’s ability to pay. Once that threshold is satisfied, the court will consider the enumerated statutory factors and make written findings regarding the basis for any award or denial. Those written findings must address the elements the statute requires, which now include whether adultery occurred and whether it resulted in an economic impact worth considering. Judges must explain in writing the factual bases for their rulings so appellate review can determine whether the decision rests on legally and factually sufficient grounds.

This framework is significant because it places responsibility on the party seeking support to come forward with strong, admissible proof. Claims that adultery should reduce or increase alimony without demonstrable financial effect are unlikely to succeed. The court’s written findings will show whether the judge found the adultery credible, whether it caused economic harm, and how that harm influenced the alimony result.

Florida recognizes different categories of alimony that serve distinct purposes. Following statutory reform, judges typically award bridge-the-gap alimony to help a spouse through short-term needs, rehabilitative alimony to assist a spouse in becoming self-supporting, or durational alimony where long-term but nonpermanent support is appropriate. Recent reforms removed permanent alimony for new cases falling under the revised statute, replacing it with more limited and structured forms. Because durational and rehabilitative awards are tied to need and ability to pay, evidentiary proof that marital funds were wasted on an affair can influence the duration and amount of these awards. For example, if the innocent spouse can show that dissipation left them with an unusual need that undermines earning capacity, a judge may be more inclined to award a larger durational amount or to craft a rehabilitative plan that accounts for the financial loss. Conversely, if the adulterous spouse’s resources were drained, the court will weigh that when assessing ability to pay.

Because the statute now requires written findings of fact regarding the basis for awards or denials of alimony, judges must explain how they applied the statutory factors. When adultery is raised, the court should describe whether it found adultery occurred, whether marital funds were used to support the affair, the amount of any demonstrable dissipation, and the relationship between any dissipation and the requesting spouse’s need. The presence or absence of these findings can determine whether an appellate court will affirm or reverse the decision. For this reason, attorneys should ask the court to make explicit findings whenever adultery and dissipation are argued.

A few misconceptions deserve correction. First, adultery alone will not automatically result in a larger alimony award or a different split of property. The law focuses on financial impact. Second, a judge will not typically punish moral wrongdoing in a way that is unrelated to economic impact; courts do not function as moral tribunals. Third, claiming adultery without evidence can backfire by adding time and expense to the case. Fourth, the new statute placed the burden of proof on the party seeking alimony so simply pointing to misconduct is not a substitute for proving need and ability to pay. Understanding these realities helps parties and attorneys focus on the facts that actually matter to the court.

Proving dissipation, quantifying economic harm, and presenting a persuasive argument to a judge requires focused experience. At Adams, Luka, & Benton P.A. we combine careful factual investigation with courtroom experience and expert coordination. We work with forensic accountants when the assets are large, serve targeted discovery, prepare clear trial exhibits, and press for the written findings that the statute requires. Whether you seek to show that adultery depleted marital assets and warrants compensation, or you are defending against such claims, we provide strategic counsel designed to protect your financial future. We also advise on settlement strategy when appropriate and negotiate with the goal of obtaining enforceable resolutions that reflect the true value of the marital estate.

Adultery can matter in Florida divorce cases, but not in the way popular culture often suggests. The legal system looks for measurable financial consequences of misconduct. Where marital funds were wasted or diverted, courts have tools to compensate the innocent spouse through both distribution of property and alimony adjustments. The reforms in Senate Bill 1416 clarified that adultery and its economic impact may be considered and emphasized the need for written findings and proof of need and ability to pay. For families facing difficult facts, careful preparation, timely financial discovery, and sophisticated presentation of evidence are essential.

If you believe adultery has affected your family’s finances and you are concerned about alimony or equitable distribution, speak with an Orlando family law attorney at our firm who understands both the statute and the practical tools necessary to document dissipation. We can assess your situation, help preserve evidence, coordinate forensic investigation, and represent your interests in negotiations or at trial.

For advice tailored to your case, contact Adams, Luka, & Benton P.A. We will review your circumstances, explain the legal standards that apply, and help you pursue a resolution that protects your financial security and your children’s future.