Mandatory Financial Affidavits

A frequent question/complaint I have in amicable divorce cases, is why do I have to file a Financial Affidavit? My general response is because the law says you have to. And now and again I will discuss the multiple reasons why I think it is also a good idea. Today however, I read a case that outlines at least one exception to the "because you have to rule." See Salczman v. Joquiel, 776 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). In that case, which for the record is not out of our appellate court but our sister court to the north, the parties entered into an ante-nuptial agreement after full disclosure. Both parties had separate counsel in the negotiation and execution of the agreement. Both were in their sixties at the time of their marriage; both had been married previously and both were financially secure. They ended their marriage after three years, each party agreeing that the ante-nuptial agreement controlled and requesting that the court ratify the same and grant their dissolution. At the final hearing, the court ordered that the parties file financial affidavits. The parties responded that they should not have to do so in light of their agreement and the fact that neither party was requesting any permanent financial relief from the other. The court indicated that it would seal the affidavits in the court file upon their being filed. The parties still refused, and the Court threatened contempt. The parties jointly appealed. Reading Fla. Fam. L. R. P. 12.285 literally, the Third District reversed the court's order directing the parties to file a financial affidavit. "Having found this agreement to be fair and reasonable on its face and entered into after full disclosure between the parties, the court was presented with absolutely no issue as to permanent financial relief for either party. Thus, the filing of financial affidavits would serve no purpose under the facts of this case and we do not believe that the rule mandates that they be filed." 776 So. 2d at 988.