Southpinellas: Ex-her might be him, but alimony same

South Pinellas

Special report

Jeb Inc.
A timeline on Jeb Bush's career and details on his speeches, corporate ties and associates.
More special reports

Video report

Teaching Piano Lessons for 80 years.
At 95-years old, Elba Ruilova still teaches piano lessons four afternoons a week from her west Tampa home. She began teaching when she was 15.
More video reports

Multimedia report

Park and Walk
The Times had a few reporters walk some of the proposed routes to the proposed new stadium.
More multimedia reports

Ex-her might be him, but alimony same

By TAMARA EL-KHOURY
Published March 29, 2007

In a mixed ruling for Florida's transgendered community, a state circuit judge Wednesday dismissed a Seminole man's request to halt alimony payments because his ex-wife had a sex change.

Judge Jack R. St. Arnold knocked down both of Lawrence Roach's arguments: that he shouldn't have to pay alimony because his ex-wife is now a man and therefore legally dead and the argument that it is illegal for a man to pay alimony to a man because Florida does not recognize same-sex marriage.

St. Arnold protected the alimony rights of Roach's ex-wife, Julia Roach, who has transitioned to a man named Julio Roberto Silverwolf, 55. Roach, 48, will have to continue his monthly $1,250 payments.

But citing prior case law, St. Arnold wrote in his ruling that, "Despite the surgery and the fact that the Respondent holds herself out to be a male, Florida recognizes the immutable female traits determined at birth."

One of Silverwolf's attorneys, Greg Nevins, said he was pleased with the judge's ruling. But the senior staff attorney with gay and transgender rights group Lambda Legal, said he didn't agree with the statement that Silverwolf should be regarded legally as a female.

Lawrence Roach and Julia Roach were married for 18 years before their divorce in 2004.

Roach did not return calls for comment, and his attorney, John Smitten, said he would not comment because he hadn't reviewed the judge's ruling.

In Pinellas County court Tuesday, Silverwolf's attorneys argued the alimony can be altered only under the terms of the former couple's settlement agreement: either party's death or that Silverwolf remarries.

St. Arnold wrote in his ruling that there is no physical evidence that Silverwolf is dead. And he said the former couple's settlement agreement stands because gender reassignment surgery was not listed as one of the circumstances under which it could be modified.

[Last modified March 29, 2007, 01:24:14]

Share your thoughts on this story

Read our guidelines for comments

Comments on this article

by linda	04/03/07 08:19 PM
this is wrong .if julia roach can afford sex change op.she/it certainly does not need alimony and if julia wants to be a man he needs to ball up and provide for himself the same as any self respecting man would do and not play poor me.

by Drew Finn	03/30/07 03:43 PM
Just move to Largo, you will fit in perfectly!!!!!!!!!

by Leigh	03/30/07 03:10 PM
I would think "Julio" would want to stand on his own two "male" feet and take care of himself, at this point. Seems like he wants the best of both worlds.

by Mark In Irvine	03/30/07 01:51 PM
"The minority is telling the rest of us normal people what is normal." I'm not letting anyone tell me what is normal. This is probably the correct ruling - J/J hasn't remarried, hasn't died, and hasn't agreed to modify the divorce agreement. NBD

by Robert	03/30/07 01:47 PM
He might argue marriage was made on a fraudulent basis in the first place. However 18 years married could be impediment to that argument. He might also seek annulment of marriage, then divorce agreements et al made void. Whatever, for justice.

by Mike	03/29/07 11:00 PM
What will happen next. The freaks are slowly taking the world over. The minority is telling the rest of us normal people what is normal. Laws need to change quick!

by Kat	03/29/07 08:11 PM
Excuse me John, but if I'm understanding the case, the ex-wife was simply expecting the state to be consistent with its previous santi-trans ruling (in the Kantaras case), which, in this case would mandate that the husband continue paying alimony.

by alex	03/29/07 07:46 PM
LOL so technically they could re-marry each other ..Congrats!! Fla first same-sex marriage!!!

by Cathy	03/29/07 07:26 PM
I wonder what Stanton and Largo Commissioners think of this? Like John said: Selfish!!!

by Mike	03/29/07 07:16 PM
That's retarded. The man has to continue paying alimony to someone now considered a man...even though gay marriages aren't recognized. A bit odd, don't you think?

by Brant	03/29/07 01:55 PM
The Legislature needs to pass a law to provide the courts with some guidance for this kind of thing.

by John	03/29/07 01:45 PM
Sound like the transgendered community is as selfish as others have made them out to be. We want to change our gender and be respected as who we are - oh!, but still consider usn our old gender if money is involved. Can't have your cake and eat it to

by Gilbert	03/29/07 12:57 PM
I hope the FL legislature, act on this properly, promptly and appropriately. I know the judge cited correct case law. But this is the most rediculous thing to date. My God, we are accepting a little too much.