Can My Ex-Spouse Get Financial Information About My New Spouse?

In the recent July 2023 case of Gay v. Gay & Mann, the Fifth District Court of Appeal of Florida weighed in on a former husband’s attempt to get personal financial information from his former wife’s new spouse.

In this case, the former husband tried to depose his former wife’s new spouse regarding his personal financial situation and the support he provided to the former wife. The new spouse filed a motion for protective order to prohibit the taking of his deposition. The trial court denied his motion for protective order. The new spouse challenged the trial court’s ruling by seeking a writ of certiorari from the appellate court.

Certiorari review generally involves analysis of whether the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law, whether the petitioner will suffer a material injury, and whether there is no other adequate remedy.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal found that the new spouse did meet the requirements for relief. The Court held that he did establish a departure by the trial court from the essential requirements of law because financial information of private persons is entitled to protection by Florida’s constitutional right of privacy if there is no relevant or compelling reason to require disclosure. The Court also held that the new spouse did show that he will suffer a material injury and that no other adequate remedy will undo the intrusion into his private financial affairs.

Thus, the Fifth District Court of Appeal granted the new spouse’s petition for writ of certiorari and quashed the trial court’s order denying his motion for protective order. The new spouse’s private financial information was protected from disclosure.

For family law practitioners, this case includes an interesting procedural side note regarding whether to seek review of these discovery orders by a writ of certiorari or by appeal. The Court noted that when the discovery relates to a nonparty, then an appeal may be the better path to seek relief as the discovery order will be final as to that nonparty. The Court quoted earlier case law indicating that an order requiring a nonparty to provide discovery is a final order because it “adjudicates the only matter in controversy as between the party seeking discovery and the nonparty ordered to provide it.” The Court ultimately noted that it has recognized both means of review as permissible.