{"id":2248,"date":"2009-04-05T14:46:21","date_gmt":"2009-04-05T14:46:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bresky-merger.local.com\/posts\/memorandum-of-law-regarding-florida-statute-6113001\/"},"modified":"2009-04-05T14:46:21","modified_gmt":"2009-04-05T14:46:21","slug":"memorandum-of-law-regarding-florida-statute-6113001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/memorandum-of-law-regarding-florida-statute-6113001\/","title":{"rendered":"Memorandum of Law regarding Florida Statute 61.13001"},"content":{"rendered":"

In addition to our appellate practice, we also offer litigation support including, but not limited to, drafting complex motions and memoranda of law for attorneys throughout all phases of pre-trial litigation.\u00a0 The firm was recently retained to draft a memorandum of law on the application of Florida Statute 61.13001.\u00a0 Specifically, the trial court requested that counsel prepare a memorandum addressing whether section 61.13001, the Parental Relocation with a Child, applied in the absence of a prior court order.\u00a0 In this particular case, the mother sought an expedited hearing on relocation and we, on behalf of the father, contended that under section 61.13001, the father was entitled to file an objection to relocation and that further the court should make the considerations and findings sufficient to support relocation in a final judgment, pursuant to section 61.13001(6)(b).\u00a0 Our efforts resulted in a victory for the client and the wife\u2019s motion for expedited hearing was denied.<\/p>\n

Section 61.13001 became effective October 1, 2006 and was intended to define and clarify the relocation process.\u00a0 A literal reading of the statute, however, suggests that the statute only applies where there is an existing order in place.\u00b9\u00a0 But, this literal reading of the statute would contravene the intent in Florida to be sure that all custody and relocation matters be determined in accordance with the best interests of the child.\u00a0 Interestingly, the Florida Supreme Court has proposed an amendment to the Family Law Rules of Procedure, Rule 12.635\u00b2, which would apply \u201cto all proceedings to relocate the residence of a child under section 61.13001, Florida Statues,\u201d without regard as to whether there is a prior court order in place.<\/p>\n

It remains to be seen whether the proposed amendment will become effective.\u00a0 It is also unclear as to how the trial courts will interpret and apply the relocation in the absence of a prior court order.\u00a0 It seems counterintuitive to have such a formal procedure established for the consideration of a child\u2019s relocation and only have the procedure apply at the existence of previous court order.\u00a0 It seems the more practical application, as illustrated by the proposed amendment, is to consider all factors as set forth in section 61.13001 anytime the issue of a child\u2019s relocation is brought before the court, irrespective of whether there has been a previous determination in the form of a court order.<\/p>\n

\u00b9 APPLICABILITY. –This section applies:
\n1.\u00a0To orders entered before October 1, 2006, if the existing order defining custody, primary residence, time-sharing, or visitation of or with the child does not expressly govern the relocation of the child.
\n2.\u00a0To an order, whether temporary or permanent, regarding the parenting plan, custody, primary residence, time-sharing, or visitation of or with the child entered on or after October 1, 2006.
\n3.\u00a0To any relocation or proposed relocation, whether permanent or temporary, of a child during any proceeding pending on October 1, 2006, wherein the parenting plan, custody, primary residence, time-sharing, or visitation of or with the child is an issue.
\n(b)\u00a0To the extent that a provision of this section conflicts with an order existing on October 1, 2006, this section does not apply to the terms of that order which expressly govern relocation of the child or a change in the principal residence address of a parent.
\n2 See, <\/em>http:\/\/www.floridasupremecourt.org\/decisions\/proposed.shtml<\/em><\/a>.
\n<\/em><\/h6>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In addition to our appellate practice, we also offer litigation support including, but not limited to, drafting complex motions and memoranda of law for attorneys throughout all phases of pre-trial litigation.\u00a0 The firm was recently retained to draft a memorandum of law on the application of Florida Statute 61.13001.\u00a0 Specifically, the trial court requested that…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2248","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2248","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2248"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2248\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2248"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2248"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2248"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}