When Gambling and Sports Betting Become a Breaking Point in a Marriage
One of the most common reasons people schedule an initial divorce consultation is discovering that a spouse has a gambling problem or, increasingly, a secret sports-betting habit that has quietly created significant debt.
With the rise of online sportsbooks and betting apps, it has become easier than ever for one spouse to rack up credit card balances, personal loans, or depleted savings without the other realizing what is happening until the damage is done. By the time the truth comes out, trust is often broken and the financial consequences feel overwhelming.
From a legal standpoint, gambling losses raise important questions in a Florida divorce, especially when it comes to how assets and debts are divided.
A Quick Overview of Equitable Distribution in Florida
Florida follows the principle of equitable distribution. This does not necessarily mean a 50/50 split of everything. Instead, the court starts with the presumption that marital assets and marital debts should be divided fairly, which is often equal but does not have to be.
In general:
Assets and debts acquired during the marriage are presumed to be marital.
Assets owned before the marriage or acquired by gift or inheritance are often non-marital, though they can become marital if they are commingled.
The court can adjust the distribution if one spouse’s conduct caused financial harm to the marriage.
This is where gambling frequently becomes a central issue.
Gambling Losses and “Dissipation” of Marital Assets
In some cases, gambling losses may be considered dissipation of marital assets. Dissipation generally means one spouse intentionally wasted marital funds for a purpose unrelated to the marriage, particularly at a time when the marriage was breaking down.
Florida courts look closely at the context. Not every gambling loss automatically counts as dissipation.
Key questions include:
Was the gambling concealed from the other spouse?
Were marital funds used without the other spouse’s knowledge or consent?
Did the gambling occur while the marriage was already undergoing an irretrievable breakdown?
Did one spouse use marital funds solely for their own benefit?
When those factors are present, courts may compensate the non-gambling spouse by awarding them a larger share of the remaining assets or assigning more of the debt to the spouse who gambled.
How Florida Courts Have Handled Gambling in Divorce
Florida case law shows that outcomes vary depending on the facts.
In Viscito v. Viscito, the court reduced the husband’s share of marital appreciation in the marital residence after finding that his secret gambling problem and related debts negatively impacted the family’s finances. The trial court considered the wife’s use of her own non-marital assets to cover gambling losses and adjusted equitable distribution accordingly, a decision the appellate court upheld.
In DeLorenzo v. DeLorenzo, the court affirmed an equitable distribution that awarded the wife the majority of marital assets and left the husband with most of the marital debt, specifically to compensate her for the husband’s dissipation of assets through gambling.
On the other hand, Zambuto v. Zambuto illustrates an important limitation. There, the appellate court reversed a trial court’s decision to charge the husband’s share of marital assets for gambling losses because the evidence showed the gambling occurred while the marriage was intact, both spouses gambled, and some of the gambling served a business or marital purpose. Without a finding of intentional misconduct tied to a breakdown of the marriage, the losses could not be treated as dissipation.
What This Means for Someone Facing Divorce
If you have discovered that your spouse has been gambling or sports betting in secret, it does not automatically mean you will be stuck with half the debt. But it also does not guarantee the court will assign all of it to your spouse.
These cases are highly fact-specific. Timing, intent, concealment, and the overall financial picture all matter. Documentation is critical. Bank statements, credit card records, betting app histories, and loan documents often become key evidence in determining whether gambling losses were ordinary marital spending or a form of dissipation.
Just as important, even if gambling does not meet the legal definition of dissipation, it can still influence other aspects of a divorce, including credibility, alimony determinations, and how the court views each party’s financial conduct.
Final Thoughts
Discovering a spouse’s gambling problem is emotionally painful and financially destabilizing. Many people delay seeking legal advice because they feel embarrassed, overwhelmed, or unsure whether the situation “counts” legally.
A consultation with a divorce lawyer can help clarify what is marital, what may be non-marital, and whether gambling losses or betting-related debt should be addressed through equitable distribution. Understanding your options early can make a significant difference in protecting your financial future.
If you suspect hidden gambling or unexplained debt in your marriage, it is worth getting informed before making any major decisions.