Skip to Content
Premier Family Law Attorneys
(561) 693-1241
Sasser, Cestero & Roy, P.A. Sasser, Cestero & Roy, P.A.
Top

So, You Want to Relocate: A Guide to Relocating with a Minor Child in Florida

Single mom with a teenage son controls a check list of things to move to new apartment.Brown cardboard boxes with copy space.Moving concept.
|

Relocating with a minor child is a complex legal process that requires careful navigation of Florida’s statutory framework. Understanding the legal requirements is essential to ensure compliance with Florida law and to protect the best interests of the child. Florida Statute § 61.13001 outlines the procedures and considerations for parental relocation with a child, and several key cases provide further guidance on how courts interpret these laws. However, there are some additional items to be aware, which is why the importance of legal assistance cannot be emphasized enough.

The initial step in the relocation process is filing a petition to relocate. According to Florida Statute § 61.13001, a parent or guardian seeking to relocate must file a petition with the court and serve it on the other parent and any other person entitled to access or time-sharing with the child. The petition must include the following to avoid dismissal at the outset:

  1. A description of the intended new residence, including the state, city, and specific physical address, if known.
  2. The mailing address of the new residence, if different from the physical address.
  3. The home telephone number of the new residence, if known. Today this is likely the same cellphone number as the parent had at the old residence.
  4. The date of the intended move.
  5. A detailed statement of the specific reasons for the proposed relocation.
  6. A proposal for the revised post-relocation schedule for access and time-sharing.

The relocation petition must then be filed under oath and served on the other parent. If the other parent does not timely object, the court may presume that the relocation is in the best interest of the child.

For an objection to be timely, the party served with the petition for relocation must file their written objection with the court and provide it to the other parent or person seeking to relocate within twenty (20) days of being served with the initial petition. Again, this is very important since absent filing of a timely response objecting to the relocation, it is presumed that the relocation is in the best interest of the child, and the relocation will be allowed without further notice and without a hearing.

If an objection to the relocation is timely filed, a notice requesting a trial must be sent to the court by the party requesting the relocation. Once a notice to set the matter for a nonjury trial is filed, the trial must occur no later than ninety (90) days after the notice is filed, absent good cause. This timeframe is intended to expedite the resolution of permanent relocation issues and to ensure that relocation requests are given priority on the court's calendar, facilitating timely judicial consideration.

But what if you have to move sooner than the ninety (90) day period? First, it is imperative that you inform your counsel of your expedited need to move prior to filing your initial petition in order to make the process as timely as possible. Under Florida Statute § 61.13001, the court may grant a temporary order allowing the relocation of the child pending a final hearing if requested and if the petition to relocate is properly filed and contains all the required information as previously discussed. Specifically, if a motion for temporary relocation is filed, the hearing must occur within thirty (30) days, unless there is good cause for delay. Success at a hearing for temporary relocation is contingent upon the court finding a likelihood that the relocation will be approved at the final hearing, supported by the same factual basis necessary for a final judgment. Although it is uncommon for a court to reverse its decision at a final hearing if a temporary relocation is granted, being denied temporary relocation is not a setback. You are still entitled to a final hearing, which means you effectively have two opportunities to present your case. If denied at the temporary relocation hearing, you can still pursue your request at the final hearing.

The parent or person wishing to relocate must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the relocation is in the child's best interest, with no presumption for or against the move. If this burden is met, it then shifts to the non-relocating parent, or person, to demonstrate, also by a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed relocation is not in the child's best interest. The court evaluates several factors to decide whether to grant or deny a relocation request, focusing on the child's best interest. These factors are as follows:

  1. The nature, quality, extent of involvement, and duration of the child's relationship with the parent or other person proposing to relocate with the child and with the nonrelocating parent, other persons, siblings, half-siblings, and other significant persons in the child's life.
  2. The age and developmental stage of the child, the needs of the child, and the likely impact the relocation will have on the child's physical, educational, and emotional development, taking into consideration any special needs of the child.
  3. The feasibility of preserving the relationship between the nonrelocating parent or other person and the child through substitute arrangements that take into consideration the logistics of contact, access, and time-sharing, as well as the financial circumstances of the parties; whether those factors are sufficient to foster a continuing meaningful relationship between the child and the nonrelocating parent or other person; and the likelihood of compliance with the substitute arrangements by the relocating parent or other person once he or she is out of the jurisdiction of the court.
  4. The child's preference, taking into consideration the age and maturity of the child.
  5. Whether the relocation will enhance the general quality of life for both the parent or other person seeking the relocation and the child, including, but not limited to, financial or emotional benefits or educational opportunities.
  6. The reasons each parent or other person is seeking or opposing the relocation.
  7. The current employment and economic circumstances of each parent or other person and whether the proposed relocation is necessary to improve the economic circumstances of the parent or other person seeking relocation of the child.
  8. That the relocation is sought in good faith and the extent to which the objecting parent has fulfilled his or her financial obligations to the parent or other person seeking relocation, including child support, spousal support, and marital property and marital debt obligations.
  9. The career and other opportunities available to the objecting parent or other person if the relocation occurs.
  10. A history of substance abuse or domestic violence as defined in Florida Statute § 741.28 or which meets the criteria of Florida Statute § 39.806(1)(d) by either parent, including a consideration of the severity of such conduct and the failure or success of any attempts at rehabilitation.
  11. Any other factor affecting the best interest of the child or as set forth in Florida Statute § 61.13.

The following cases are examples which illustrate how Florida courts approach relocation requests involving minor children. These cases highlight the various factors considered by the courts, such as the child's best interest, the relationship with both parents, and the potential impact on the child's quality of life. By examining these decisions, we gain insight into the legal reasoning and principles that guide the courts in making determinations about relocation.

  1. In Fredman v. Fredman, 960 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007), the court denied the mother’s request to relocate with her children to Texas, finding that the move was not in the children’s best interest. The court considered the children’s relationship with their father and extended family in Florida, as well as the potential impact on their schooling and family life.
  2. In Orta v. Suarez, 66 So. 3d 988 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011), the court allowed the mother to relocate to California with her child, as she demonstrated that the move was in the child’s best interest. The court found that the relocation would enhance the child’s quality of life and that the mother was the primary caregiver.
  3. In Sanabria v. Sanabria, 271 So. 3d 1101 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019), the court reversed a relocation order because the trial court improperly shifted the burden of proof to the non-relocating parent. The appellate court emphasized that the relocating parent must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the relocation is in the child’s best interest.
  4. In Coyle v. Coyle, 8 So. 3d 1271 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), the court reversed a relocation order, emphasizing that the trial court must consider whether substitute arrangements would be sufficient to foster a continuing meaningful relationship between the non-relocating parent and the child.
  5. In Ness v. Martinez, 249 So. 3d 754 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018), the court upheld the denial of a mother’s petition to relocate, finding that the relocation would not improve the child’s educational opportunities and would remove the child from extended family.

As evidenced by the aforementioned cases, to achieve the desired outcome in relocation cases, it's essential to clearly articulate not only why you need to move but also why relocating is in your child's best interest. Navigating the legal process can be challenging, especially when a child's well-being is at stake. An experienced attorney can provide invaluable support by ensuring all procedural requirements are met, such as timely filing and serving the petition, gathering and presenting evidence, and advocating for your interests in court. Legal representation is crucial, as demonstrated in cases like Ward v. Waters, 389 So. 3d 652 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024), where the court's decision relied on the proper application of statutory factors and competent evidence.

This can be a very stressful process, so why not just skip it and move away with your child? Relocating a child without a court order can lead to significant legal issues under Florida Statute 61.13001. If a parent relocates a child before obtaining the necessary court approval, they may face legal consequences, including being held in contempt of court. This action can negatively impact the parent's credibility and standing in future court proceedings. The court may view the unauthorized relocation as an attempt to undermine the other parent's rights, potentially resulting in unfavorable rulings regarding custody and time-sharing. Additionally, the relocating parent may be required to return the child to the original location until the court makes a formal decision. It is crucial for parents to adhere to legal procedures and obtain a court order before relocating with a child to avoid these potential legal repercussions.

Ultimately, the decision to relocate with a minor child should not be taken lightly. It requires a strategic approach, comprehensive preparation, and a clear articulation of how the move serves the child's best interest. Engaging experienced legal counsel is essential to ensure compliance with legal procedures, to present a robust case, and to avoid potential legal repercussions associated with unauthorized relocations and better position themselves to achieve a favorable outcome in relocation proceedings.