MILITARY RELOCATION HAPPENS

          Relocation is one of those things that is taken for granted while serving in the Armed Forces of the United States.  When Florida has jurisdiction over the servicemember or the family, Florida’s statute governing relocation will apply.

     Florida Statute §61.13001 governs parental relocation with a child.  It is a child centric statute basing the decision on the best interests of the child, forcing the Court to evaluate11 factors, the 11th factor being a catch all including all the factors enumerated in Florida Statute §61.13, Support of Children; parenting and time-sharing; powers of court.

          Those extremely important factors are:

(a)  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 non-relocating parent, other persons, siblings, half-siblings, and other significant persons in the child's life.

(b) 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.

(c)  The feasibility of preserving the relationship between the non-relocating 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 non-relocating 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.

(d) The child's preference, taking into consideration the age and maturity of the child.

(e)  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.

(f)   The reasons each parent or other person is seeking or opposing the relocation.

(g)  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.

(h) 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.

(i)    The career and other opportunities available to the objecting parent or other person if the relocation occurs.

(j)    A history of substance abuse or domestic violence as defined in §741.28 or which meets the criteria of §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.

(k) Any other factor affecting the best interest of the child or as set forth in §61.13.

          The person desiring to relocate has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence that relocation is in the best interest of the child (Not the parent – Not because the parent receives orders to a new duty station.).  Once that burden is met, it shifts to the non-relocating parent to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the proposed relocation is not in the best interest of the child.  A preponderance of the evidence is the greater weight of the evidence, or evidence that more likely than not tends to prove a certain proposition.

          Florida judges carry a heavy case load and it can take months to get a hearing date for a relocation trial.  A military move is often schedule much sooner than the court’s availability to try the matter.  The Relocation statute provides that relocation hearings are given priority for hearings or trial, but hearing times are often not fast enough.  The fact is it is sometimes difficult to find enough hearing time within the statutory framework of 90 days.  If the Court grants a temporary hearing logic says this is where the fight is; what judge is going to grant a child to temporarily leave the area but then bring them back after a final hearing?

          If an action for parental relocation with a child is filed, a clock starts ticking and it is extremely important a proper response is filed.  Ignoring a petition to relocate can result in the relocation being allowed without further notice and without a hearing.