FL Relocation Law Doesn't Apply to Pre-Filing Moves (2026)

Florida Courts: The Relocation Statute Doesn't Reach a Move That Happened Before Your Case Existed

Florida appellate courts have confirmed that the parental relocation statute, F.S. §61.13001, applies only to a move made after a family-law case is pending. When a parent had already relocated before any petition was filed, the statute's notice-and-petition machinery does not control. Instead, the court sets time-sharing under the ordinary best-interests standard in F.S. §61.13(3).

The News Hook

Florida has one of the most procedurally demanding relocation statutes in the country. Under F.S. §61.13001, a parent who wants to move 50 or more miles away for at least 60 consecutive days must either get the other parent's written agreement or file a formal petition to relocate, serve it, and wait — and moving without following those steps can be treated as contempt and weighed against the moving parent.

But what happens when a parent moved first and the divorce or paternity case came later? A recent district court of appeal decision drew the line clearly: the relocation statute is triggered by a change in an existing arrangement. If there is no pending action and no established time-sharing order at the time of the move, there is nothing for §61.13001 to modify. The court doesn't ask whether the parent "violated" the relocation statute. It asks the broader question every Florida time-sharing decision turns on — what arrangement serves the child's best interests, given where each parent now actually lives.

That distinction matters enormously in practice, and it resolves a point that has confused separating parents for years.

Legal Implications for Florida Cases

The holding has three concrete effects.

The move is a fact, not a violation

When the relocation predates the case, a parent who moved is not automatically penalized for skipping the §61.13001 petition process — because that process never applied. The trial court cannot treat the pre-filing move as bad-faith "self-help" the way it might treat a mid-case relocation done without agreement or leave of court. The move simply becomes part of the factual landscape the judge evaluates.

The best-interests factors do the work

With the statute off the table, F.S. §61.13(3)'s roughly 20 best-interests factors govern the parenting plan. Distance still matters — it just enters through factors like the geographic viability of the parenting plan, the length of time the child has lived in a stable environment, and each parent's capacity to facilitate a close relationship with the other parent, rather than through the relocation statute's rebuttable framework.

Timing can change the legal test entirely

The same physical move — say, a parent relocating from Tampa to Atlanta — can be governed by two completely different legal standards depending on whether it happened before or after a case was filed. Filed first, then move: §61.13001 controls, and the moving parent generally carries the burden through a petition. Move first, then file: best interests controls, and neither parent starts with a statutory thumb on the scale.

Florida-Specific Analysis

Florida abandoned "custody" and "visitation" language years ago. Under F.S. §61.046 and §61.13, Florida courts allocate time-sharing and require a parenting plan in every case involving minor children. There is no presumption for or against any particular time-sharing schedule beyond the 2023 change in F.S. §61.13(2)(c)3 that directs courts to begin from a presumption that equal (50/50) time-sharing is in the child's best interests — a rebuttable presumption, not a guarantee.

That 2023 reform interacts with pre-filing moves in an important way. If parents live hundreds of miles apart because one already relocated, a literal 50/50 rotation may be logistically impossible. The equal-time-sharing presumption can be rebutted by evidence — and geographic distance is exactly the kind of evidence that rebuts it. Courts routinely craft long-distance parenting plans (extended summer and holiday blocks, virtual contact, and allocation of travel costs) when a week-on/week-off schedule can't work.

It is also worth separating this decision from the 2023 alimony overhaul (SB 1416). SB 1416 eliminated permanent alimony and reshaped spousal support, but it did not change relocation or time-sharing law. This appellate ruling is purely about which time-sharing framework applies, not about money.

Finally, note what the ruling does not do. It does not give a parent a green light to move a child out of Florida to gain a strategic advantage. A parent who relocates before filing still has to persuade the court that the resulting arrangement serves the child — and a move that cuts the other parent off, or that looks engineered to control jurisdiction, can cut against the moving parent when the judge weighs the §61.13(3) factors.

Practical Takeaways for Florida Residents

• If you and your co-parent already live apart and both agree on the time-sharing schedule, that agreement can be written into a parenting plan and submitted as part of an uncontested divorce. The relocation-statute procedure is not something you have to litigate when nobody is fighting about the move.
• If a move is planned and no case has been filed yet, understand that filing first can change the legal test that applies to your situation. Sequence matters.
• If the move is disputed — one parent wants to relocate with the child and the other objects — this is a contested matter. It is not an uncontested divorce, and it typically requires a family-law litigator to handle a relocation petition or a contested time-sharing trial.
• Document the child's actual living situation. Because best interests turns on facts (school, community, stability, each parent's involvement), the parent who can show a stable, child-centered arrangement is in a stronger position.
• Do not assume an out-of-state move ends Florida's authority over your case. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), codified at F.S. Chapter 61, Part II, determines which state decides — and Florida often remains the child's "home state" for a period after a move.

At our firm, we handle Florida uncontested divorces for a flat $750, including cases with minor children, where that package adds a parenting plan, a child-support guidelines worksheet, and a UCCJEA affidavit. If you and your spouse agree on time-sharing — even across state lines — a long-distance parenting plan can usually be documented cleanly. If your relocation is contested, we'll be candid: that's outside the uncontested product, and we'll point you toward Divorce.law's vetted attorney network for the litigation you'll need.

Related reading:

• FL Court: Set Alimony Before Child Support, No Self-Help Cuts
• FL Appeals Court Reverses Child Support: Precision Matters (2026)
• No New 2026 Florida Alimony Formula or Time-Sharing Law
• Uncontested Divorce With Children Tampa FL: $750

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Florida's relocation statute apply if I moved before filing for divorce?

No. F.S. §61.13001 governs a relocation of 50 or more miles that changes an existing time-sharing arrangement in a pending or decided case. If you had already moved before any family-law case was filed and there was no existing order, the statute's notice-and-petition requirements do not apply. The court instead sets time-sharing under the best-interests factors in F.S. §61.13(3).

What is the difference between the relocation test and the best-interests test?

The relocation statute imposes a specific procedure — written agreement or a served petition — and can weigh an unauthorized move against the moving parent. The best-interests test under F.S. §61.13(3) is a broader factor analysis with no statutory penalty for the move itself; distance is just one consideration among roughly 20 the judge weighs.

Can I move out of state with my child before filing to avoid the relocation rules?

Moving first does change which legal test applies, but it is not a loophole. A judge still evaluates whether the resulting arrangement serves the child, and a move that appears designed to cut off the other parent can hurt you under the best-interests factors. The UCCJEA (F.S. Chapter 61, Part II) may also keep Florida in control of the case even after you leave.

Does this ruling change Florida's equal time-sharing presumption?

No. Florida still starts from a rebuttable presumption that equal time-sharing serves the child, added in 2023 under F.S. §61.13(2)(c)3. When parents live far apart because of a pre-filing move, geographic distance is common evidence that rebuts the presumption, and courts craft long-distance parenting plans instead.

Can an uncontested divorce include a parent who has already moved away?

Yes, if both spouses agree on the parenting plan. Distance alone does not make a divorce contested. When the parties agree on a long-distance time-sharing schedule and everything else, the case can proceed as an uncontested $750 flat-fee divorce with a written parenting plan and a UCCJEA affidavit. A disputed relocation, by contrast, is a contested matter that needs a litigation attorney.

Legal Disclaimer

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. Florida family law is fact-specific, and appellate decisions can be refined or distinguished in later cases. You should consult a licensed Florida attorney about your particular situation before making decisions about relocation, time-sharing, or filing. Antonio G. Jimenez, Esq., is licensed to practice law in Florida (Florida Bar No. 21022).