Florida SB 1128: Faster Time-Sharing Hearings Stalled

What Happened With Florida SB 1128

Florida SB 1128 (2026) proposed giving certain time-sharing matters priority on court calendars, adding procedural rules for temporary parental responsibility hearings, and requiring annual reporting of these hearings by judicial circuit. The bill cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee 11-0 on February 10, 2026, but died in the Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice on March 13, 2026. It is not law.

News Hook: A Push to Speed Up Time-Sharing Disputes

For parents stuck in family court, delay is often the hardest part. A motion to establish or enforce a parenting plan can sit for weeks or months while a child's living arrangement remains uncertain. Florida SB 1128, filed for the 2026 legislative session, aimed squarely at that problem.

The bill, titled CS/SB 1128: Family Law, would have amended three statutes:

• Florida Statute 61.13, which governs support of children, parental responsibility, and time-sharing.
• Florida Statute 742.031, which addresses hearings and court orders in paternity matters.
• Florida Statute 26.20, which concerns the availability of judges for hearings.

At its core, the legislation sought to require that certain time-sharing matters be accorded priority on a court's calendar and to establish procedural requirements for evidentiary hearings on motions seeking to establish temporary parental responsibility and time-sharing. It also would have directed the State Courts Administrator to prepare annual reports on these hearings, broken down by judicial circuit.

Despite a unanimous favorable vote in the Judiciary Committee, the bill did not advance past appropriations and died in committee on March 13, 2026. Its proposed effective date had been July 1, 2026.

Legal Implications for Florida Divorce Cases

Even though SB 1128 did not become law, the proposal is worth understanding because it reflects a recurring tension in Florida family court: the gap between a parent's urgent need for a time-sharing decision and the realities of a crowded docket.

A few of the bill's proposed changes stand out.

Calendar Priority for Time-Sharing

The bill would have required courts to give priority to certain time-sharing matters rather than treating them like any other contested motion. In practice, that could have meant faster evidentiary hearings on temporary time-sharing — the interim arrangement that controls where a child lives while the larger case is pending.

From Discretion to Requirement

One of the more meaningful shifts was changing courts from being authorized to make parenting plan determinations to being required to do so in certain proceedings. Under current Florida law, a parenting plan is mandatory in any case involving a time-sharing schedule, but the bill sought to tighten how and when those determinations must be made in temporary-relief postures.

A Data-Reporting Mandate

The annual reporting requirement to the State Courts Administrator would have created, for the first time, circuit-by-circuit data on how long these hearings take. That transparency could have informed future reforms even if it did not directly shorten any one parent's wait.

Because the bill died, none of these changes are in effect. Florida courts continue to schedule time-sharing motions under existing rules and local practice.

Florida-Specific Analysis

SB 1128 did not arise in a vacuum. It built on a multi-year pattern of Florida time-sharing reform.

The most significant recent change came with SB 1416 in 2023, which amended Florida Statute 61.13 to clarify the standard for modifying a parenting plan and time-sharing schedule. That law established a rebuttable presumption that equal time-sharing is in the best interests of the child, shifting the starting point for many cases toward 50/50 schedules absent a reason to deviate. SB 1128 can be read as a procedural follow-up: the 2023 reform addressed what courts should decide, while the 2026 bill targeted how quickly they decide it.

Florida's existing framework already requires a parenting plan in every case involving minor children, governed by the best-interest factors in F.S. 61.13(3). Temporary time-sharing — the interim schedule — is one of the most contested early issues in litigated cases, which is exactly the friction point SB 1128 tried to address.

Here is the practical reality the bill could not change by itself: most of the delay in Florida family court comes from contested litigation. When two parents disagree on schedules, decision-making, or relocation, the case requires hearings, discovery, and sometimes a guardian ad litem. Those steps take time regardless of calendar-priority rules.

By contrast, parents who agree on a parenting plan avoid the docket entirely. An uncontested case with a fully signed parenting plan does not wait for an evidentiary hearing on temporary time-sharing, because there is nothing for the court to fight over. That structural difference is why agreement remains the fastest path through Florida's family courts — faster than any procedural bill could make a contested matter.

Practical Takeaways for Florida Residents

If you are navigating a Florida divorce or paternity case involving children, here is what the SB 1128 episode means for you.

• SB 1128 is not law. Do not rely on calendar-priority or expedited-hearing provisions that were never enacted. Time-sharing motions are still scheduled under current rules.
• The trend is toward equal time-sharing. The 2023 SB 1416 presumption favoring 50/50 schedules under F.S. 61.13 remains in effect and shapes how most temporary and final schedules are decided.
• Agreement beats litigation on speed. The single biggest factor in how fast your time-sharing is resolved is whether you and the other parent agree. A signed parenting plan removes the hearing entirely.
• A parenting plan is mandatory. Any Florida case with minor children requires a parenting plan addressing time-sharing, decision-making, and how parents communicate. You cannot finalize without one.
• Legislation can return. Bills that die in committee are frequently refiled. The themes in SB 1128 — faster hearings and data reporting — may reappear in a future session.

For parents who already agree on the major issues, an uncontested divorce is the most efficient way to obtain a court-approved parenting plan. Our firm handles uncontested Florida divorces for a flat $750 attorney fee, including cases with minor children, where the package adds a parenting plan, a child support guidelines worksheet, and a UCCJEA affidavit. You can learn more in our Uncontested Divorce With Children in Florida guide or our Parenting Plan in Florida Divorce guide.

If your situation is genuinely contested — where calendar priority would have mattered most — that is exactly the kind of case SB 1128 was aimed at, and the kind that still moves through court the slow way. Understanding the difference between uncontested and contested divorce in Florida is the first step in choosing your path.

To see how Florida's broader 2026 legislative picture is shaping family law, you can also review our coverage of Florida's permanent alimony ban.

Frequently Asked Questions

For a plain-language walkthrough of how parenting plans work in an agreed case, see our Florida parenting plan guide.

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 law and pending legislation change frequently, and the status of any bill described here reflects the legislative session noted. For advice about your specific situation, consult a licensed Florida attorney.

Antonio G. Jimenez, Esq., Florida Bar No. 21022