Anthony Meehan Genova, Esq., B.C.S.
When a marriage ends, family law courts routinely partition marital assets, establish spousal support, and approve shared parenting plans. However, when a foreign national spouse or minor child requires federal immigration filings to maintain lawful status in the United States, matrimonial dissolution introduces complex legal friction. Does a former spouse have an affirmative legal obligation to sign, execute, or consent to post-dissolution immigration applications? It is a question our divorce and child custody attorneys in Lakeland hear often from international families across Central Florida.
A decision from Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal, Del Fabbro v. Bonetto, No. 3D26-0150, 2026 WL 2589385 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 2, 2026), directly confronts this question. The ruling establishes that express covenants within a Marital Settlement Agreement (MSA) create enforceable legal duties regarding immigration cooperation. At the same time, Del Fabbro illustrates how contractual ambiguity surrounding immigration terminology forces trial courts to conduct full evidentiary hearings to determine parental intent.
The dispute in Del Fabbro arose between Paola Del Fabbro (Former Wife) and Luca Bonetto (Former Husband). The parties’ minor child—a dual national of Italy and Great Britain—resided in the United States on a temporary student visa. The Former Wife sought to initiate an immigration application to obtain lawful permanent residency (a green card) for the child, but the Former Husband refused to consent.
The Former wife filed a motion to enforce Section 12.8(h) of the parents’ MSA. Section 12.8 established Shared Parental Responsibility over major life decisions, explicitly listing “immigration application” as a major decision. Section 12.8(h) provided that the “parties agree to cooperate in this process and neither parent shall unreasonably withhold consent”. Crucially, a separate provision—Section 12.18—governed routine student visa renewals.
At a December 8, 2025 hearing, the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County denied Former Wife’s motion without taking any evidence. The trial judge ruled as a matter of law that Section 12.8(h) imposed no enforceable legal obligation on either party, characterizing the clause as a mere agreement to negotiate whether to apply. The trial court also conflated permanent residency filings under Section 12.8(h) with student visa maintenance under Section 12.18. The Former Wife appealed.
Reviewing the record de novo, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order. Writing for a unanimous appellate panel, Chief Judge Scales emphasized that an agreement is legally ambiguous when it remains “susceptible to two different interpretations, each of which is reasonably inferred from the terms of the agreement”.
Because Section 12.8(h) used the broad phrase “immigration application,” the parents advanced competing, reasonable interpretations. The Former Wife argued the clause encompassed lawful permanent residency applications, whereas the Former Husband contended it applied only to nonimmigrant student visa maintenance. Because the parents’ actual intent was not clear from the four corners of the agreement, the appellate court held that the trial judge erred by deciding the issue as a pure question of law. On remand, the trial court must hold a full evidentiary hearing to evaluate parol and extrinsic evidence regarding the drafting of Section 12.8(h).
Beyond addressing contract interpretation, Del Fabbro establishes a clear precedent regarding post-dissolution legal duties. The appellate panel explicitly rejected the trial court’s view that the MSA contained no enforceable obligations. Instead, Chief Judge Scales held that the plain text of Section 12.8(h) imposes an express, legally binding covenant on each parent to refrain from unreasonably withholding consent.
Consequently, if the trial court determines on remand that “immigration application” includes permanent residency filings, it must conduct an evidentiary inquiry into whether Former Husband’s refusal to consent was reasonable under the circumstances. A former spouse cannot arbitrarily withhold consent when an MSA contains an explicit non-unreasonableness mandate.
Ultimately, Del Fabbro v. Bonetto demonstrates that while divorce dissolves the marital union, properly drafted settlement covenants create concrete, judicially enforceable duties regarding post-dissolution immigration applications.
Does your marital settlement agreement address your child’s immigration status? Our divorce and family law attorneys in Lakeland can review your agreement and help protect your child’s future in the United States.
Anthony Meehan Genova, Esq., B.C.S., is a legal professional specialized in family law, particularly known for his extensive experience in trial law and his commitment to community service.
Mr. Genova is Board Certified in Marital & Family Law. This certification, widely regarded as the “gold standard” for Florida lawyers, signifies Florida’s official, independent determination of a lawyer’s expertise to practice in a specialty field of law. The Board Certification program, overseen by The Florida Supreme Court and administered by The Florida Bar, rigorously evaluates all board-certified lawyers for credibility, expertise, professionalism, and ethics.
To achieve this esteemed certification, Mr. Genova demonstrated a dedication to achieving a heightened level of excellence through character, professionalism, ethics, and credibility. The rigorous process requires at least five years of practice, substantial involvement in the chosen area, successful passing of a comprehensive examination, and a rigorous peer-review process. Additionally, board-certified lawyers must satisfy continuing legal education requirements that are more robust than those for general licensure. This certification is valid for five years and requires continued practice and attendance of Florida Bar-approved continuing legal education courses for recertification. As of 2023, only 260 lawyers in Florida (less than 1% of the 114,000 eligible Florida Bar members) have earned board certification in Marital and Family Law. Clients retaining a board-certified lawyer like Mr. Genova gain access to specialized expertise, professionalism & ethics, credibility, and a heightened dedication to excellence, offering assurance of a heightened level of proficiency in Marital & Family Law.
In addition to his board certification, Mr. Genova has been a Supreme Court Certified Marital & Family Law Mediator since 2019.
Mr. Genova is also trained in Collaborative family law since 2017.
He has been a dedicated member of the Executive Council of the Family Law Section of the Florida Bar since 2016. His significant involvement within this section includes various leadership and committee roles, demonstrating a deep engagement with the evolution and practice of family law. Mr. Genova is currently the 2025-26 Chairman of the Domestic Violence Committee and has a “Stand Your Ground” article published in the September/October 2026 Florida Bar Journal.