To maintain a divorce action, there needs to be both personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction. For there to be subject matter jurisdiction, at least one of the parties needs to be a resident of the State of Florida for at least six (6) months prior to the filing of the divorce action. However, this residency requirement is only for subject matter jurisdiction over the divorce action. It does not convey subject matter jurisdiction over children’s issues, such as timesharing and parental responsibility.

The State of Florida has codified the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (“UCCJEA”). Under the UCCJEA, jurisdictional priority to make an initial child custody determination is given to the child’s “home state”.

Personal jurisdiction is perfected by serving process on the other party in the State of Florida. Service of process can be accomplished by personally serving the other party or through “constructive service” meaning serving someone over the age of 15 at the party’s residence. See § 48.031(1)(a), Fla. Stat. If service of process cannot be completed in Florida, you can obtain personal jurisdiction through Florida’s “long-arm statute.” The “long-arm statute” allows for service outside of Florida so long as the party being served is maintaining a matrimonial domicile in Florida at the time the case was initiated, or, if the party was a resident of the state of Florida, immediately preceding the filing of the case. See § 48.193(1)(e), Fla. Stat.

It is important to remember that to be awarded any financial relief, as part of the divorce, you must have personal jurisdiction over the other party. Without personal jurisdiction over the other party, a trial court will only have jurisdiction to dissolve the marriage, nothing else.

Therefore, residency is important due to the residency requirement to establish subject matter jurisdiction. Whereas, nationality has no bearing on subject matter or personal jurisdiction. Domicile only applies in connection with trying to obtain personal jurisdiction over a party who is served outside the State of Florida.

Florida courts will primarily look at which forum/jurisdiction perfected jurisdiction first. Pursuant to Florida law, a trial court perfects jurisdiction once a case has been filed and the other party has been served. Other states deem jurisdiction perfected once the case has been filed. Therefore, under the principal of priority, a “file first” state will be given priority over a Florida case where service of process has not been completed because the other state perfected service first. The same would be true in a case filed in another country.

Applicable law is relevant in the State of Florida. Florida law is comprised of multiple different sources including, but not limited to, The Florida Statutes, Florida case law, and the Court Rules of Procedure. To that point, multiple different sources govern family law matters. Dissolution of marriage actions are governed by Chapter 61 of the Florida Statutes. Paternity actions are governed by Chapter 742 of the Florida Statutes. Chapter 88 of the Florida Statutes codifies the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act. These statutory provisions are defined and developed through Florida case law which comes from opinions issued by Florida’s six District Courts of Appeal and the Florida Supreme Court. Further, these types of actions are regulated through the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure. Therefore, Florida law is developed through multiple sources.

Florida is not a fault-based divorce state. There is only one ground for divorce, and that ground is that the marriage is “irretrievably broken”. The broad procedure and timeline for a divorce is heavily dependent on a myriad of different factors depending on the complexity of the case, but, generally speaking, contested cases are supposed to be completed within six months from filing a dissolution of marriage action. However, six months from filing a dissolution of marriage action is not always a realistic goal.

Florida cases begin with a Petition for Dissolution of Marriage. Simply put, a fully litigated family law case is generally divided into three phases. First, there is the initial filing of the pleadings phase, which can include certain pre-trial motions and initial discovery requests. Second, the case moves into the discovery phase, where the parties are required to disclose certain information about their case. Third, the case moves into a phase of seeking resolution, with resolution being achieved by either settling the case and/or preparing for trial.

Service of Process can be completed in a few ways. A person can be personally served, which is where a party receives copies of the initial filing document in-person from a process service. See § 48.031(1)(a), Fla. Stat. Also, service can be completed through “constructive service”, which is where a person 15 years of age or old is served with a copy of the documents at the party’s residence. See id. There is also service by publication. However, service by publication requires strict compliance with the directives of Chapter 49 of the Florida Statutes.

Personal service and constructive service are sufficient for the person to have jurisdiction over the individual to grant financial relief. However, service by publication is not sufficient to have jurisdiction over the individual to grant financial relief.

Although acceptable in some states, “drop service” is generally not sufficient service in the State of Florida. The only exception is when the party being served is actively evading service at the time service is attempted. This form of service is governed by case law, not statutory law.

Parties cannot make a joint application for divorce in the State of Florida. However, Florida does have a “simplified divorce” process. Parties must meet certain qualifications to qualify for the “simplified divorce” process. One of the qualifications is that the parties agree on all issues attendant to the parties’ marriage. This process is not possible if the parties have children even if the parties agree.

Foreign marriages;

Foreign marriages are recognized so long as the marriage is a valid marriage under the laws of the foreign jurisdiction. See Montano v. Montano, 520 So.2d 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). However, if a purported marital relationship in a foreign jurisdiction would be deemed invalid in that jurisdiction, the marital relationship must be deemed invalid here. See Claflin v. Claflin, 288 So. 3d 774, 777 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2020) (citing Betemariam v. Said, 48 So. 3d 121, 125 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (holding that because the Commonwealth of Virginia mandated a marriage license as a condition of marriage, and the litigants had never obtained such a license, “[t]he trial court had no choice but to determine that no legal marriage had occurred”)).

Foreign civil partnerships / civil unions;

Florida law does not have a legal status for civil partnerships / civil unions. Under Florida law you can only be married or unmarried. Nevertheless, legally valid and/or binding statuses from other jurisdictions will be recognized under Florida law. However, this issue has been significantly less relevant since the legalization of same-sex marriage throughout the United States.

Customary marriages, or Religious marriages.

Generally, customary and/or religious marriages performed in Florida are recognized as legal marriages so long as they comply with the statutory requirements for marriage licenses. See § 741.07, Fla. Stat. If the licensing requirements are not met, the customary and/or religious marriage is not a legal marriage in the State of Florida.

However, if the customary and/or religious marriage occurs in a foreign jurisdiction that considers the marriage to be a valid legal marriage, Florida trial courts will recognize the customary and/or religious marriage as a valid legal marriage under the principal of comity.

§ 741.212(1), Fla. Stat. explicitly states that, “Marriages between persons of the same sex entered into in any jurisdiction, whether within or outside the State of Florida, the United States, or any other jurisdiction, either domestic or foreign, or any other place or location, or relationships between persons of the same sex which are treated as marriages in any jurisdiction, whether within or outside the State of Florida, the United States, or any other jurisdiction, either domestic or foreign, or any other place or location, are not recognized for any purpose in this state.” Further, Art. I, § 27 of the Florida Constitution states, “Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.” Therefore, Florida statutory law as written does not recognize same-sex marriages/unions.

However, federal legal precedent rendered these same-sex marriage / union statutory prohibitions constitutionally invalid. See Brenner v. Scott, No. 4:14CV107-RH/CAS, 2016 WL 3561754, at *4 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 30, 2016). The Brenner opinion followed the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015), which established a fundamental constitutional right to same-sex marriage nationwide.

However, same-sex marriage in Florida is a hotly debated political issue, along with other topics addressing diversity and inclusion. Under the current political climate, same-sex marriages could be invalidated in the future.

The forms of financial relief that the Court can award as part of a divorce case are equitable distribution, alimony, child support, and attorneys’ fees and costs. Equitable distribution is Florida’s property distribution scheme. This is how marital assets and liabilities are divided. Alimony is Florida’s form of maintenance or spousal support. There are multiple types of alimony: durational, bridge-the-gap, vocational, and lump-sum. Child support is the parties’ obligations to financially support their minor child(ren). A trial court can also order a party to pay the other party’s reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

Florida’s property distribution scheme is equitable distribution. § 61.075, Fla. Stat governs equitable distribution. Equitable distribution is based on the premise that all marital assets and liabilities will be equally divided between the parties. However, § 61.075(1), Fla. Stat. provides that the Court can award an unequal distribution of the marital assets and liabilities if there is justification to do so based on a factors-based test. No one factor is determinative, and the factors are as follows:

(a) The contribution to the marriage by each spouse, including contributions to the care and education of the children and services as homemaker.

(b) The economic circumstances of the parties.

(c) The duration of the marriage.

(d) Any interruption of personal careers or educational opportunities of either party.

(e) The contribution of one spouse to the personal career or educational opportunity of the other spouse.

(f) The desirability of retaining any asset, including an interest in a business, corporation, or professional practice, intact and free from any claim or interference by the other party.

(g) The contribution of each spouse to the acquisition, enhancement, and production of income or the improvement of, or the incurring of liabilities to, both the marital assets and the nonmarital assets of the parties.

(h) The desirability of retaining the marital home as a residence for any dependent child of the marriage, or any other party, when it would be equitable to do so, it is in the best interest of the child or that party, and it is financially feasible for the parties to maintain the residence until the child is emancipated or until exclusive possession is otherwise terminated by a court of competent jurisdiction. In making this determination, the court shall first determine if it would be in the best interest of the dependent child to remain in the marital home; and, if not, whether other equities would be served by giving any other party exclusive use and possession of the marital home.

(i) The intentional dissipation, waste, depletion, or destruction of marital assets after the filing of the petition or within 2 years prior to the filing of the petition.

(j) Any other factors necessary to do equity and justice between the parties.

However, Florida case law provides very little guidance on when it is appropriate for the Court to grant an unequal distribution. There are significantly more appellate opinions overturning unequal distributions.

The trial court can make interim financial provisions by awarding various forms of interim relief. This includes interim partial equitable distribution, temporary alimony, temporary child support, and temporary attorneys’ fees and costs.

Interim partial equitable distribution awards are governed by § 61.075(5), Fla. Stat., and they are generally rare. More commonly they occur based upon agreement of the parties as these types of awards require a finding of “good cause” to support these awards. “Good cause” is defined as the existence of extraordinary circumstances. The existence of extraordinary circumstances is based on the following factors:

1. Whether there is a need for funds in order to avoid or prevent the loss of an asset through repossession or foreclosure, the loss of housing, the default by either party of a marital debt, or the levy of a tax lien.

2. Whether there is a need for funds to pay an expense for a dependent child if nonpayment of the expense would be detrimental to the child.

3. Whether one or both parties have a need to access funds in order to pay a reasonable amount of the attorney fees, court costs, or other suit money for maintaining or defending a proceeding under this chapter.

4. Any other circumstances that justify the entry of an order granting an interim partial equitable distribution.

Temporary alimony awards and temporary attorneys’ fees awards are more commonly awarded forms of temporary relief, over interim-partial equitable distribution. They are more common because they do not require the existence of “exceptional circumstances”. Temporary alimony and temporary attorneys’ fees awards are governed by the legal principal of “need and ability to pay”. The requesting party must show a present financial need for such an award, and they requesting party must prove that the opposing party has the present “ability to pay” temporary alimony and/or attorneys’ fees. Temporary alimony awards are not subject to the same restrictions as durational alimony awards as to the amount that can be awarded. Trial court judges have immense discretion when awarding temporary financial relief.

Temporary child support awards must be awarded, and they are calculated in the same manner as a final child support order.

Alimony awards are governed by § 61.08, Fla. Stat. This statute recently underwent significant changes. As of July 1, 2023, permanent alimony was abolished, which is alimony for an indefinite period of time. Under current Florida law, trial courts can award one or multiple forms of alimony. The available forms of alimony are: 1) durational alimony; 2) rehabilitative alimony; 3) bridge-the-gap alimony; and 4) lump-sum alimony. For example, a party may be awarded bridge-the-gap and durational alimony or rehabilitative alimony and durational alimony as these forms serve different purposes.

Durational alimony is awarded for a set period of time. It is usually paid monthly as a set amount. There is not a standard formula to determine the amount or duration. However, there are caps limiting the maximum duration and maximum amount that can be awarded. Durational alimony cannot be awarded in marriages that are shorter than three (3) years. Therefore, there are limitations on a trial court’s discretion in awarding duration alimony. However, a trial court can utilize its discretion to extend the duration of a durational alimony award beyond the cap provided. § 61.08(8)(b), Fla. Stat. provides that, “Under exceptional circumstances, the court may extend the term of durational alimony by a showing of clear and convincing evidence that it is necessary after application of the factors in subsection (3) and upon consideration of all of the following additional factors:

1. The extent to which the obligee’s age and employability limit the obligee’s ability for self-support, either in whole or in part.

2. The extent to which the obligee’s available financial resources limit the obligee’s ability for self-support, either in whole or in part.

3. The extent to which the obligee is mentally or physically disabled or has been diagnosed with a mental or physical condition that has rendered, or will render, him or her incapable of self-support, either in whole or in part.

4. The extent to which the obligee is the caregiver to a mentally or physically disabled child, whether or not the child has attained the age of majority, who is common to the parties. Any extension terminates upon the child no longer requiring caregiving by the obligee, or upon death of the child, unless one of the other factors in this paragraph apply.” Therefore, there may be a basis to extend a durational alimony beyond the duration cap.

Rehabilitative alimony is designed to assist a spouse in establishing the capacity for self-support through either the redevelopment of previous skills or credentials, or the acquisition of education, training, or work experience necessary to develop appropriate employment skills. This form of alimony is unique because it requires a specific and defined rehabilitative plan as part of any order, and the length of the award may not exceed five (5) years.

Bridge-the-gap alimony is spousal support that is meant to aid a spouse in the transition from being married to being single. It is most often awarded in short-term marriages. Bridge-the-gap alimony cannot be awarded for a duration that exceeds two (2) years. This type of alimony is unique because, unlike durational and rehabilitative alimony, it cannot be modified.

Lump-sum alimony is alimony paid in a lump-sum payment. Lump-sum alimony awards are very rare. To award lump-sum alimony, the trial court must find that there are extraordinary circumstances to justify awarding support in a lump-sum.

Foreign financial orders are enforceable in the State of Florida. Foreign support orders are enforced through the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (“UIFSA”), which is codified in Chapter 88 of the Florida Statutes. The version of UIFSA codified by the State of Florida establishes a registration process. That process is detailed in § 88.6021, Fla. Stat. Once a support order is registered, a Florida trial court has a number of remedies in which to enforce the Order. A trial court can utilize its contempt power to implement coercive fines and penalties, which includes, but is not limited to, entering orders to garnish wages, implementing fines and fees, and even incarceration. Additionally, orders can be entered requiring the forfeiture of property.

The same is true for judgments adjudicating property rights. A trial court can garnish wages, order the forfeiture of property, etc. However, a trial court cannot hold a party in civil contempt for failure to comply with financial awards that are not in the nature of support. Therefore, there is no ability to have the non-compliant party incarcerated.

It is possible for a party to make financial claims even if a divorce judgment has been entered in a foreign jurisdiction, so long as the divorce judgment does not adjudicate property or support rights. By way of example, in Lee v. Lee, 352 So. 3d 420 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022) the parties were Finnish citizens. The parties were previously divorced in Finland. Id., at 425. However, “Finland has a “divisible divorce” process, in which the court first dissolves the marriage, followed, if necessary, by separate proceedings to determine issues related to child custody, child support, alimony, and equitable distribution.” Id. The Finnish court did not resolve any equitable distribution or alimony issues. Id. Accordingly, these financial issues could be heard and resolved by a Florida trial court. The same is true for proceedings heard in other states. See Binger v. Binger, 555 So. 2d 373, 375 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (when a Missouri divorce judgment did not adjudicate alimony and property rights, these issues could be decided in a Florida action).

Florida has a marital property regime based on its equitable distribution laws developed through the statutory language of § 61.075, Fla. Stat and the guiding principles established in Florida’s case law. Assets acquired and liabilities incurred during the parties’ marriage are presumptively “marital”, subject to certain exceptions. Upon dissolution of marriage, the premise of that property regime is that marital assets and liabilities will be equally divided. However, this is not a matrimonial property regime that parties may select because it is default upon marriage. The only way to opt out is through the execution of a valid and enforceable Premarital or Postnuptial agreement.

Foreign property regimes will be recognized so long as they do not violate Florida’s public policy. § 61.0401, Fla. Stat. specifically governs the application of foreign law in dissolution of marriage matters. § 61.0401(2) & (3) state,

“(2) A court may not enforce:

(a) A choice of law provision in a contract selecting the law of a foreign country which contravenes the strong public policy of this state or that is unjust or unreasonable.

(b) A forum selection clause in a contract that selects a forum in a foreign country if the clause is shown to be unreasonable or unjust or if strong public policy would prohibit the enforceability of the clause under the specific facts of the case.

(3) Before enforcing a judgment or order of a court of a foreign country, a court must review the judgment or order to ensure that it complies with the rule of comity. A judgment or order of a court of a foreign country is not entitled to comity if the parties were not given adequate notice and the opportunity to be heard, the foreign court did not have jurisdiction, or the judgment or order of the foreign court offends the public policy of this state. As used in this subsection, a “foreign court” or “court of a foreign country” includes any court or tribunal that has jurisdiction under the laws of that nation over the subject of matters governed by this chapter or chapter 88.”

Premarital Agreements and Postnuptial Agreements are binding in the State of Florida. The State of Florida has a strong public policy favoring freedom of contract and the enforcement of contracts. See City of Largo v. AHF-Bay Fund, LLC, 215 So. 3d 10, 16 (Fla. 2017).

Premarital Agreements executed in the State of Florida must comply with § 61.079, Fla. Stat., which codifies a version of the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act. § 61.079, Fla. Stat. applies only to Premarital Agreements, and it only applies to Premarital Agreements executed on or after October 1, 2007.

This distinction can be important if a party is attempting to vacate a Premarital Agreement because the standards to vacate are different. The legal standard for vacating Premarital Agreements executed before October 1, 2007 is based on case law, not the standard contained within § 61.079, Fla. Stat. The legal standard to vacate Postnuptial Agreements is governed by case law regardless of when the agreement was executed.

Premarital Agreements and Postnuptial Agreements executed in other jurisdictions, whether in the United States or a foreign country, can be enforced by a Florida trial court. However, such agreements are subject to the dictates of § 61.0401, Fla. Stat., which governs the application of foreign law in Florida dissolution of marriage matters. Assuming that an agreement is valid and enforceable in the jurisdiction where it was executed and it does not violate Florida’s public policy, the agreement will be enforced by a Florida trial court.

Child support in Florida is the right of the child. Child support must be ordered in all parties and may not be waived by the parents. Every Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage with minor children or Marital Settlement Agreement must include a Child Support Guidelines Worksheet showing the parties’ incomes and calculation of child support.

Child support is determined by a statutory calculation predominantly based upon the parents’ respective net incomes and the number of overnights the child spends with each parent. This calculation determines a percentage of support each parent is responsible for and the amount of support to be paid for a child or children. Florida courts may deviate up to 5% from the statutory calculation.

In extremely high net worth cases, the statutory calculation creates a perverse result in an extreme amount of child support owed from one party to another. Through case law, courts established the concept of good fortune child support. Good fortune child support may be based on either agreement of the parties’ or some arbitrary amount determined by the Court which factors in the needs of the child and the relative incomes of the parties.

Child support in Florida is owed until the child turns eighteen (18) years old or until the child completes high school if the child turns eighteen (18) while they are still in high school with the expectation that the child will complete high school prior to their nineteenth (19) birthday.

The court may order exclusive use and possession of the marital home based upon a finding that it is in the children’s best interest that they remain in the home throughout their minority and that the parents are financially able to do so. Additionally, based upon findings of special circumstances, the Court may order a parent to secure their child support obligation through a life insurance policy.

Cohabitation is not recognized under Florida law absent a contracted Cohabitation Agreement. Cohabitation is not a family law construct, but is a civil contract that would require a claim in civil court, not in family court for enforcement.

As cohabitation is not legally recognized in Florida, neither is separation. Statutory claims for palimony or support incident to cohabitation do not exist. Cohabitees may seek relief through civil claims such as partition to force the sale of a jointly owned property or unlawful detainer to have an invited guest in the home removed by Court Order. However, none of these claims would be brought in family court.

Separated parents who are not yet officially divorced do not have a specific legal status in relation to their children. Separated parents have equal rights and should have equal access to their children. Neither parent has a superior right to timesharing or parental responsibility for their children absent a court order.

Prior to July 1, 2023, if the parents were never married, the mother was considered the natural guardian of the child pursuant to Florida Statutes, which gave her the superior and only right to timesharing and decision-making authority for the child. The father, even if listed on the child’s birth certificate, was required to petition the court for his rights in relation to the child. After the statutory changes made in 2023, a father had a legal right in relation to the child without petitioning the Court. The statutory change did not establish a Parenting Plan and specific timesharing arrangements, but it made the father’s inclusion on a birth certificate more than a rebuttable presumption.

Regardless of whether the parents were married or not, the Court’s analysis and required findings for a Parenting Plan are the same.

The jurisdictional requirements for child arrangements/child custody proceedings are set forth in Florida Statutes 61.501-61.542, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). Florida has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination if it is the home state of the child. The home state is where the child has resided for the six (6) months immediately preceding the filing allowing for temporary absences. If the child is under six (6) months, the home state of the child is where the child has lived since birth. In the event of an emergency, if Florida is not the home state, courts may take emergency jurisdiction under the UCCJEA to make temporary child custody determinations. However, absent an emergency, the home state provisions are strictly followed for purposes of jurisdiction.

In Florida, child orders are based upon parental responsibility or timesharing. Parental responsibility is the decision-making authority for major decisions affecting children. There is a statutory presumption that parents should have shared parental responsibility, which means they should make major decisions affecting the health and welfare of the child together. In some circumstances, where the Court finds that the parents making decisions together would be detrimental, such as a situation of domestic violence, the Court can order sole parental responsibility or ultimate decision-making authority. Sole parental responsibility grants one parent the right to make all major decisions effecting the child. Ultimate decision-making may be granted for specific issues such as non-emergency healthcare or education. Ultimate decision-making allows one parent to essentially make the decision after trying to agree with the other parent and being unable agree with that parent. Timesharing determinations relate to the child custody schedule and the child’s living arrangements. Timesharing is measured by the number of overnights a child spends with each parent.

The first order a court will typically enter is a Temporary Relief Order. This Order can set out a Temporary Parenting Plan creating a schedule for child custody and living arrangements and other parameters on parenting during the pendency of the case.

At the conclusion of the case, either by the Court’s determination or by agreement of the parties, a Parenting Plan is entered. The Parenting Plan is a document that determines the regular timesharing schedule, holiday timesharing, school designation, communication with the child, communication between parents, the child’s living arrangements among other provisions. Parenting Plans are always modifiable; however, the burden is high to persuade the Court to modify.

The guiding principle behind all child custody/living arrangement determinations is the best interest of the child determined through the assessment of the twenty-one (21) factors set forth in Florida Statute 61.13. For a long time, courts deferred to ordering an equal timesharing schedule between the parents; however, this was codified as law on July 1, 2023. Now there is a rebuttable presumption that equal timesharing is in the best interest of the child. The statute does not recommend a certain schedule, but the statute presumes the child should spend an equal number of overnights with each parent.

There are multiple steps the Court can follow to hear the voice of the child. The Court may appoint a Guardian Ad Litem or “next friend of the child” pursuant to Florida Statute 61.403. The Guardian Ad Litem speaks to the child, the parents, family members, teachers and other relevant witnesses to create a report making recommendations to the Court for child custody and decision-making authority. The Guardian Ad Litem is not an attorney or advocate for the child. The Court can, however, appoint an attorney ad litem to serve this role pursuant to 61.401.

The Court may also appoint a social investigator to conduct a neutral assessment of the family. A social investigation may include not only witness interviews and home visits like a Guardian Ad Litem will report, but also scientific testing for a psychological evaluation of the parties or the children.

Aside from one of the appointments outlined above, courts are extremely hesitant to allow testimony of children. To have a child testify, the party must seek the Court’s specific permission. However, judges traditionally do not want to involve the children or have them testify against their parents. If a judge did find the child’s testimony necessary, the child’s testimony would likely be taken through an in-camera interview where the judge interviews the child with a court reporter and away from the parents and their respective attorneys.

§ 61.13001, Fla. Stat., as it is written, specifically governs a parent’s ability to relocate – not a child’s ability to relocate. Pursuant to the statute, parents cannot relocate more than fifty (50) miles from their home or their location at the time of the last custody determination. This statute governs relocation regardless of whether the move is within or outside of the jurisdiction so long as it is over fifty (50) miles. A relocation less that fifty (50) miles is permissible and does not require court intervention. This is important to note as there are parts of Florida where a move of fifty (50) miles or could be outside of the jurisdiction and other parts of the state where it could not. The determination of fifty (50) miles is defined as in a straight line or in a fifty (50) mile radius around the address “as the crow flies.”

The guiding principle in all issues regarding children is Florida is “the best interest of the child.” There are twenty-one (21) statutory factors the Court uses to make this determination. Additionally, in a relocation proceeding there are additional factors the Court must consider in determining whether a relocation is in the child’s best interest.

There are very specific requirements as to how one petitions and responds to a Petition for Relocation. The statute sets forth pleading requirements such as the inclusion of a job offer, if one exists, and language providing notice to the opposing party of the potential consequence of their failure to respond. There are timelines set forth for responses and expedited hearings on relocation issues.

The evidentiary standard is a preponderance of the evidence for a relocation case. This standard is a lower standard than other family law proceedings. Though the standard may be lower, it should be noted that relocations are typically very challenging to obtain.

§§ 61.501-61.542, Fla. Stat. codify the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). The UCCJEA sets forth the process for registration and domestication of a foreign order including the process for filing the order, what information must be included and notice requirements to the other party and an expedited timeline for hearing. Upon completion of the requirements and without contest from the opposing party, the registration will be confirmed as a matter of law in Florida. Upon completion of that process that foreign order is recognized and may thereafter be enforced in Florida. The statute goes on to specific the requirements for a petition for enforcement of a child custody determination, service of the petition, and the subsequent hearing and order. This is a very specific codified process that is clearly laid out to allow for compliance and expedited relief.

Florida, as part of the United States, is a signatory to The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980 (hereinafter “Hague Convention”). Florida Courts expedite actions for international child abduction pursuant to the Hague Convention. Relief may be sought in either federal or state court. Traditionally, cases brought in federal court will be heard on a more expedited basis. It is important to note that the defenses as they are written under Hague Convention are honored in Florida Courts. Though in Florida the standard for decisions relating to children is based upon the best interest of the child, which is not a consideration in a Hague Convention proceeding.

Surrogacy and surrogacy arrangements are permissible under Florida law to married couples, both same sex and heterosexual, who are over eighteen (18) years of age. Surrogacy is only permissible when a doctor determines that the commissioning mother cannot carry a pregnancy to term or that gestation is a risk to either the health of the mother or the fetus. Surrogacy arrangements are memorialized via contract. The contract must state that the surrogate relinquishes her rights upon the child’s birth, unless neither of the commissioning parents are genetically parents of the child. The contract must also require the commissioning parents to accept custody upon the child’s birth. Surrogates may receive payment for their reasonable living, legal, medical, psychological, and psychiatric expenses directly related to the pregnancy and postpartum. Additional payment beyond these services is prohibited by statute.

Florida law permits adoption by both same sex couples and heterosexual couples. Adoption is also legally permissible to individuals and cohabitating couples. In adoption proceedings, like other Florida custody determinations, the Court’s focus is on the best interest of the child.

Mediation is the most commonly used form of non-court dispute resolution. Most circuits across the state require parties to attend at least one (1) mediation prior to setting a matter for trial. Many circuits also require a mediation before the Court will hear a request for temporary support or attorney’s fees for the pendency of the litigation.

Other than mediation in Florida, both collaborative law and arbitration are forms of non-court dispute resolution. The collaborative process brings together the parties, their attorneys, and a team of neutrals to settle a divorce action outside of court. This process has specific requirements which have been outlined and codified in Florida Statutes 61.55-61.58. The parties cannot be required to engage in the collaborative process. Parties must sign a contract and agree to engage in the collaborative process.

Arbitration may be a binding or non-binding process where the parties submit their case before an arbiter to decide the issues. Non-binding arbitration is exactly as it sounds – non-binding – therefore, any decision reached by an arbiter is not a final order that may require compliance. A court cannot require the parties to submit issues to arbitration – parties must agree on arbitration. In a family law context, any case involving children may not be subject to the binding arbitration process. Therefore, arbitration is a much less commonly utilized form of non-court dispute resolution.

Agreements reached by the parties in the collaborative process or through mediation are valid contracts. Florida law promotes the freedom to contract. Therefore, so long as the agreement reached comports with the minimal actual requirements of Florida law, the agreement will be ratified by the Court and honored.

In the past few years there have been several reforms in family law. These reforms have included issues related to timesharing with children, parental responsibility or decision make for children, business valuation, alimony, and equitable distribution. With so much recent reform, there are not many issues that are likely to see reform in the near future. However, child support is consistently an issue in Florida that is ripe for debate and reform. Florida’s child support statute has not been amended for many years and there are always disgruntled parents, both payees and payors, who seek to change the current statute.

Another potential area for reform in Florida is the discovery process and how information is obtained from the opposing party or non-parties to a case. There are rumblings of a desire to implement rules regarding the documents that may be requested in a family law case.

Attorney’s fees awards and considerations for vexatious litigation are heavily discussed in Florida case law which may lead to a codified amendment to the current attorney’s fees statutes.

Another consideration for issues that may be subject to reform is deeply connected to the political climate in the United States overall and in Florida specifically. There is discussion of making same sex marriage no longer legal. Some would argue this is reform while others may say it is the unwinding of prior reforms. Regardless of the viewpoint, it is something that has been a hot topic for discussion on a national level.

Florida is known as the “Sunshine State”. Family proceedings, as are all proceedings in Florida, are conducted “in the sunshine “meaning proceedings are open to the public and the press is allowed to attend. It should be noted that adoption proceedings are private by law. Judges, in their discretion, may hold hearings in their chambers for privacy purposes. Judges may also conduct final hearings dissolving the marriage by sworn affidavit avoiding the requirement for the parties to appear in court and therefore avoiding appearing “in public”.

Parties may seek to have their agreements kept out of the court file based on precedent set by Florda case law. However, the Final Judgment itself is generally public information as well. Though, the Final Judgment may be written in a manner to minimize the disclosure of sensitive information.

Under Florida law, a surviving spouse has a right to an “elective share”. An “elective share” is a share of the elective estate of the deceased spouse. Upon divorce, a former spouse no longer has this right. Until a final judgement is entered dissolving the marriage by Court Order, if one party dies during the divorce proceedings, the parties remain married and the right to the elective share is still available to the surviving spouse. It should be noted that parties are able to contract away their right to the elective share in a Premarital or Postnuptial Agreement. Additionally, parties may contract to not serve as Executors of a former spouse’s Will or as Personal Representatives of a former spouse’s estate in their Marital Settlement Agreement.