Florida SB 1128: 5-Day Time-Sharing Hearings (2026)

What Happened With Florida SB 1128

Florida SB 1128 (2026), sponsored by Senator Erin Grall, would have amended F.S. 61.13 to require at least one judge in every judicial circuit be available on weekends, holidays, and after hours to hear time-sharing enforcement motions, and to force a hearing within 5 business days of a motion to enforce a time-sharing order. The bill died in committee on March 13, 2026.

The News Hook

If you are a Florida parent who has watched the other side ignore your time-sharing schedule while your motion sits on a crowded docket for months, SB 1128 was written for you. The bill, formally titled an act relating to family law, proposed one of the most aggressive procedural reforms to time-sharing enforcement in years.

The core promises were striking:

• A duty judge available at all times in each circuit, including weekends, holidays, and after regular business hours, to hear motions to enforce time-sharing orders and agreements.
• A hard 5-business-day deadline for the judge assigned to a case to hold an evidentiary hearing on a motion to enforce time-sharing.
• A backup rule: if the assigned judge could not hear the motion within 5 business days, the duty judge or an available family division judge had to conduct the hearing.
• A requirement that the court issue an order within 5 days after the evidentiary hearing concluded.
• Priority calendar treatment for motions to establish temporary parental responsibility and time-sharing.
• A new transparency mandate: beginning July 1, 2027, the Office of the State Courts Administrator would publish an annual public report on these evidentiary hearings in each judicial circuit.

The bill cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee on a unanimous 11-0 vote on February 10, 2026, then died in the Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice on March 13, 2026. The committee analysis flagged an indeterminate but likely significant negative fiscal impact, warning that judicial workload could climb to the point that the state would need to fund additional judges and staff. The proposed effective date had been July 1, 2026.

Legal Implications for Florida Time-Sharing Cases

To understand why SB 1128 mattered, you have to understand the gap it was trying to close. Florida already gives parents real remedies when time-sharing is denied. Under F.S. 61.13, a court that finds time-sharing was improperly withheld must award the wronged parent makeup time-sharing scheduled at the noncompliant parent's expense, and may order that parent to pay the other side's court costs and attorney's fees. Willful violations can rise to contempt of court.

The problem has never been the remedies. It has been the timing. A makeup-time order means little if the hearing to get it is six months away. By the time a contested enforcement motion reaches an evidentiary hearing in a busy circuit, a child may have missed a summer, a holiday season, or an entire school semester with one parent.

SB 1128 attacked that delay directly. The 5-business-day hearing deadline and the after-hours duty judge would have converted time-sharing enforcement from a slow civil process into something closer to an emergency docket. That is a meaningful shift in how Florida treats parenting disputes.

The flip side, and the reason the bill stalled, is cost and capacity. Requiring a judge to be on call nights, weekends, and holidays in all 20 judicial circuits is expensive, and the Legislature was not prepared to fund it this session.

Florida-Specific Analysis

SB 1128 did not appear in a vacuum. It built on the 2023 reforms in SB 1416, which rewrote F.S. 61.13 to create a rebuttable presumption that equal time-sharing is in the best interests of the child. Under current law, a parent who wants something other than a 50/50 schedule must rebut that presumption by a preponderance of the evidence, and the 2023 law also relaxed the modification standard so a parent need only show a substantial and material change in circumstances, no longer an unanticipated one.

The through-line from 2023 to 2026 is clear: Florida's policy direction is toward maximizing both parents' involvement and toward making time-sharing orders meaningful in practice. SB 1416 strengthened the substantive right to equal time. SB 1128 was the procedural sequel, an attempt to make sure that right could be enforced quickly when one parent ignored it.

It is worth being precise about scope. SB 1128 targeted enforcement and temporary establishment of time-sharing, not the underlying best-interest analysis under F.S. 61.13(3). It would not have changed how a parenting plan is decided. It would have changed how fast a court steps in when an existing plan is violated.

The bill's death does not undo any of the 2023 changes. The equal time-sharing presumption, the makeup-time remedy, and the contempt powers all remain Florida law today. What did not survive is the expedited 5-day enforcement machinery.

Practical Takeaways for Florida Parents

For parents navigating a divorce or an existing parenting plan, here is what the SB 1128 story actually means:

• Nothing changed on July 1, 2026. Because the bill died, there is no new 5-business-day enforcement deadline and no after-hours duty judge requirement. Enforcement still moves at your circuit's normal pace.
• Your existing remedies are still strong. If the other parent withholds time-sharing, F.S. 61.13 still entitles you to makeup time at their expense, attorney's fees, and potential contempt. Document every denied exchange in writing.
• A clear parenting plan prevents most enforcement fights. Vague language about holidays, pickups, and decision-making is what fuels disputes. A precise, court-approved plan is your best protection, far more reliable than hoping for a fast hearing.
• Uncontested divorces avoid this entire problem. When both spouses agree on a parenting plan up front, there is no contested enforcement docket to wait on. That is one of the strongest arguments for resolving your divorce by agreement rather than litigation.

For couples who genuinely agree on the terms of their split, an uncontested divorce keeps you out of the enforcement system this bill was trying to fix. Our firm handles uncontested Florida divorces, with or without minor children, for a flat $750 attorney fee. When children are involved, that package includes a complete parenting plan, a child support guidelines worksheet, and the UCCJEA affidavit, drafted to be specific enough to head off the exact violations SB 1128 was meant to address.

If you want to understand how a strong parenting plan is structured, see our guide on the parenting plan in a Florida divorce. For the broader contrast between agreeing and fighting it out, read uncontested vs contested divorce in Florida. And if you are weighing whether to hire counsel at all, our breakdown on whether you need a lawyer for an uncontested divorce walks through the tradeoffs.

Legislation like SB 1128 tends to come back. Senator Grall's office has pushed family law reform before, and the unanimous Judiciary Committee vote suggests broad support for the policy even if the funding was not there in 2026. We will continue tracking whether a similar bill returns in a future session.

Legal Disclaimer

This article is provided by Antonio G. Jimenez, Esq., Florida Bar No. 21022, for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Legislation changes, and bills that die in one session may be reintroduced. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, consult a licensed Florida attorney.