USA – FLORIDA Law and Practice Contributed by: Raymond J. Rafool, II, Seth J. Rutman, Kaylin R. Cohen and Melissa L. Kanoff, Rafool, PLLC
never automatically dispositive nor is it a “super fac - tor” for the court. 2.3.3 Age/Maturity of the Child See, 2.3.2 Wishes and Feelings of the Child, as the wishes and feelings of the child tie directly to their age and maturity. 2.3.4 Importance of Keeping Children Together Section 61.13001 (7)(a) of the Florida Statutes expressly requires the court to consider the child’s relationship with siblings and half-siblings as part of the nature, quality, extent of involvement and duration of the child’s relationships with significant persons in the child’s life. However, this is just another statutory factor under Fla. Stat. § 61.13001 (7). In all practicality, courts are loath to separate siblings unless dictated by the specific circumstances of the family, always considering the best interests of the children as the The feasibility of preserving the relationship between the non-relocating parent and the child is addressed in § 61.13001 (7)(c), which requires the court to consider the logistics of contact, access and time-sharing; the financial circumstances of the parties; whether substi - tute arrangements are sufficient to foster a continuing meaningful relationship; and the likelihood of compli - ance with substitute arrangements by the relocating parent once he or she is out of the jurisdiction of the court (Fla. Stat. § 61.13001 (7)). This factor carries particular weight in international relocation cases, as seen in Ward v Waters , 389 So. 3d 652 (Fla 3d DCA 2024). In Ward , even though not an international case, the court affirmed the denial of a father’s petition to relocate to Hawaii, citing find - ings that transportation costs between Key West and Hawaii were overly burdensome and that differing time zones precluded the mother from meaningfully com - municating with the child. 2.3.6 Which Reasons for Relocation Are Viewed Most Favourably? There is no one reason for relocation that the courts appear to be the most sympathetic towards. Rather, the courts are statutorily required to consider all enu - polestar consideration. 2.3.5 Loss of Contact
merated factors, at a minimum. Ultimately, “the con - cern in a relocation determination is whether the relo - cation is in the best interests of the child” ( Rossman v Profera , 67 So. 3d 363, 365 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)). However, Florida courts have consistently viewed the following reasons for relocation favourably: (i) a job opportunity/offer that materially improves the fam - ily’s financial circumstances ( Orta v Suarez , 66 So. 3d 988 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)) and (ii) relocation to an area offering a higher standard of living and an improved quality of life ( Harman v Alonso , 425 So. 3d 674 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)). 2.3.7 Grounds for Opposition to Relocation The relocation statute requires a holistic approach analysing all statutory factors in determining the best interests of the child. There is no one ground for opposition that the courts appear to be the most sympathetic towards. However, courts have viewed opposition to relocation favourably where: (i) the non-relocating parent has a strong, active, ongoing relationship with the child that would be substantially curtailed by the move ( Flint v Fortson , 744 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Harris v Migliore , 789 So.2d 477 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); (ii) relocation would serve pri - marily the relocating parent’s interests rather than the child’s ( Rossman v Profera , 67 So. 3d 363 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)); and (iii) the child has deep roots in the current community (school, friends, extended family) ( Mehler v Mehler , 555 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). 2.3.8 Costs of an Application for Relocation Filing fees vary depending on whether relocation is raised as part of an original petition or by supplemen - tal petition. As of August 2026, the Miami-Dade Coun - ty Clerk of Courts filing fee is approximately USD300 for an initial action. Reopening an existing case carries a separate, lower fee of USD50.00. An uncontested relocation, where both parents agree to the move and its terms, typically involves a lower cost, driven mainly by how quickly the parties can reach an agreement. A contested relocation can cost significantly more, particularly where the case involves custody evaluations, expert witnesses, extensive dis - covery or a trial.
165 C HILD RELOC AT I ON 20 26
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook