Paul J. Knudsen, Esq., specializes in divorce and family law.
Paul has tried cases both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney, giving him a unique perspective on the trial and appeals process.
Paul is a native Floridian, growing up in New Port Richey and Orlando before obtaining his bachelor’s degree at Florida State University (Go Seminoles!).
While studying at Florida Coastal School of Law, Paul joined the school’s nationally ranked Moot Court Honor Board for his appellate advocacy skills, later managing the team which represented the school at the Moot Court National Championship.
Paul received Dean’s List Honors multiple times in law school and finished in the top 14% of his class.
Paul has tried cases in the Courtroom as a prosecutor, a defender, and as a family law attorney. The experience helped him recognize when to fight in court and when to settle a case for his client.
Paul worked as an Assistant State Attorney for Pasco and Pinellas Counties, trying over 25 trials ranging from 1st-degree felonies to DUIs.
After leaving the State Attorney’s Office, Paul went into private practice specializing in divorce and family law. He began his career as a prosecutor, trying cases even before being barred as an attorney, given his qualifications as a certified legal intern.
Paul’s trial experience goes back so early in his career that he found out he passed the Florida Bar Exam during a jury selection in a DUI trial. After being sworn in as an attorney, Paul first chose that trial and secured a guilty verdict for the State of Florida.
Since leaving the State Attorney’s Office in 2013, Paul has continued his extensive litigating, spending on average 3-4 days in court per week.
Paul has conducted hundreds of adversarial hearings to date on behalf of his clients and has over a dozen trials since joining Private Practice, on top of his nearly 30 jury trials while a prosecutor.
In 2017 alone, Paul tried 7 divorce/family law cases. In one of Paul’s last trials of 2017, he was able to show a court that the 3 years of 50/50 custody was not in the best interest of the minor child and convinced the court to adopt a much more stable parenting plan for his client.