Florida Statute 61.13001 is one of the most procedurally detailed and most frequently violated statutes in Florida family law. Parents who are planning to move with a child, or who are responding to a co-parent’s proposed move, consistently make the same mistakes: they misread the threshold, they skip required notice steps, they rely on verbal agreements, and they move before obtaining court approval. Each of these errors has real legal consequences, and some of them are difficult or impossible to undo after the fact.
This piece walks through the statute’s requirements systematically, identifies where parents most commonly go wrong, and explains what the correct procedure actually looks like. Whether you are the parent who wants to move or the parent who wants to stop a move, understanding what the statute actually requires is the starting point for protecting your rights and your child’s stability.
Getting the Threshold Wrong: The Fifty-Mile and Sixty-Day Requirements
The most fundamental error parents make with Florida’s relocation statute is misjudging whether it applies to their situation. Parents frequently assume the statute only applies to moves out of state, or to major relocations like moving to a different region of the country. That assumption is wrong, and acting on it without confirming whether the statute applies is the source of many relocation violations in Florida.
Florida Statute 61.13001 applies when a parent subject to a custody or timesharing order intends to establish a new principal residence at a location that is more than fifty miles from their current principal residence, and that new residence is intended to be maintained for more than sixty consecutive days.
Both thresholds are required. The statute does not apply to a temporary stay of less than sixty days even if the distance exceeds fifty miles. And it does not apply to moves within fifty miles even if the parent intends to stay permanently. The trigger requires both conditions to be satisfied simultaneously.
What parents frequently get wrong is underestimating how quickly the fifty-mile threshold is reached in the greater Tampa Bay area. A parent living in one part of Hillsborough County who moves to Pasco, Hernando, Polk, or parts of Pinellas County may cross the fifty-mile threshold depending on the specific addresses involved. The measurement is from the current principal residence, not from the other parent’s home or from any other reference point.
Parents also miscount the sixty days. A move that starts as temporary but extends past the sixty-day mark becomes subject to the statute even if it was not intended to be permanent when it began. A parent who relocates temporarily, tells the other parent it is only for a few months, and then stays longer than sixty days has triggered the statute retroactively.
A Tampa divorce lawyer advising a parent who is considering any move of potentially fifty miles or more will calculate the distance carefully and advise whether the statute applies before any action is taken.
The Notice Requirement: What Must Be Sent and When
When the relocation statute applies and the relocating parent wants to move without first obtaining agreement from all parties, the statute requires service of a notice of intended relocation before the move occurs. This is one of the most commonly skipped steps, and skipping it has immediate legal consequences.
The notice of intended relocation must be served on every other person entitled to timesharing with the child. It must be served by certified mail, return receipt requested, or by personal service in the manner provided for service of process.
The statute specifies what the notice must contain. A checklist of required elements includes:
The address of the intended new residence, including the mailing address if different from the physical address.
The home telephone number at the new location if known.
The date of the intended move or proposed relocation.
A brief statement of the specific reasons for the proposed relocation. A vague statement is not sufficient. The statute requires specificity.
A proposal for a revised parenting plan. This is one of the elements that parents most often omit or present inadequately. The relocating parent must propose a specific revised timesharing schedule and not simply state that the existing plan will continue or that the parties will work something out later.
A warning to the non-relocating parent that objection to the relocation must be made within thirty days of service of the notice, and that failure to object within that period may result in the court treating the relocation as agreed to by the non-relocating parent.
Each of these elements is required. A notice that omits any of them is deficient and may not trigger the thirty-day response period correctly.
A Florida divorce attorney who handles relocation cases will prepare the notice carefully and ensure that it is served in the manner the statute requires, because a defectively served or deficiently drafted notice can create procedural problems that delay and complicate the entire proceeding.
The Thirty-Day Response Window: What Happens on Each Side
Once the notice of intended relocation is properly served, the non-relocating parent has thirty days to file an objection with the court. This thirty-day window is one of the most consequential procedural deadlines in the relocation statute, and missing it has serious effects.
If the non-relocating parent does not file an objection within thirty days of being served with the notice, the statute provides that the court shall treat the relocation as allowed and shall modify the parenting plan and timesharing schedule to reflect the relocation if the court finds such modification is in the best interests of the child.
This is not simply a procedural default. The non-relocating parent who misses the thirty-day window has significantly undermined their ability to oppose the relocation. Courts treating the relocation as allowed still have authority to address the parenting plan, but the non-relocating parent who does not timely object has forfeited a substantial portion of their procedural rights.
Some parents miss this deadline because they are not paying attention to their mail, because they receive the notice during a busy period and intend to deal with it later, or because they assume they have more time than they do. Others miss it because the notice was served but they did not fully appreciate the significance of the thirty-day requirement.
The lesson for non-relocating parents is that a notice of intended relocation requires immediate attention and, if there is any intent to oppose the move, immediate legal consultation. A Tampa divorce attorney whose client has received a relocation notice will file the objection before the deadline regardless of how the client ultimately wants to proceed, because failing to object preserves more options than allowing the deadline to pass.
The Agreed Relocation Path: What “Agreement” Actually Requires
When both parents agree to the relocation, the statute provides a path that avoids contested litigation. But this path has its own requirements that parents frequently mishandle.
A verbal agreement between the parents that the relocating parent can move is not a legally sufficient agreement under the statute. The agreement must be in writing, signed by all parties, and must include a revised parenting plan that addresses the impact of the relocation on timesharing.
The written agreement must then be submitted to the court for ratification and incorporation into a court order. An agreement that sits in a file or exists only as a signed paper between the parties, without being submitted to the court, is not a legally enforceable agreement under the statute.
The failure to have the agreement ratified by the court creates a significant practical problem. If the relocating parent moves in reliance on a private written agreement that was never submitted to the court, and the other parent later changes their mind or claims the agreement does not mean what the relocating parent thought it meant, the relocating parent is in a difficult position. There is no court order authorizing the relocation, and the other parent can argue the move was unauthorized.
A Tampa divorce lawyer handling a cooperative relocation will always submit the written agreement to the court for incorporation into an order, regardless of how amicable the parties are at the time of the agreement. The court order is what makes the agreement legally secure.
The Petition for Relocation: What Must Be Included
When the other parent objects or when there is no agreement, the relocating parent must file a petition for relocation with the court. Like the notice, the petition has specific content requirements under the statute, and omitting required elements can result in the petition being found deficient.
The petition must include:
A description of the location of the intended new residence, including the state, city, and specific physical address if known.
The mailing address if different from the physical address.
The home telephone number at the new location if known.
The date of the intended move or proposed relocation.
The specific reasons for the proposed relocation. Again, the statute requires specificity, not a general statement about wanting a fresh start or needing to be closer to family.
A proposal for a revised parenting plan, including a time-sharing schedule and the designation of a primary residential parent if that changes as a result of the relocation.
A statement acknowledging that other required notices have been served.
The petition must be served on all parties entitled to timesharing. The other parent then has twenty days to respond to the petition and may also file a counter-petition seeking to prevent the relocation.
A Florida divorce attorney preparing a relocation petition will include all of the required elements with sufficient specificity to withstand scrutiny, and will build the substantive case for the relocation into the petition itself rather than leaving it for later.
The Temporary Relocation Problem: Acting Before the Court Rules
One of the most serious and most common mistakes parents make in relocation cases is moving before the court has issued an order. When the other parent has objected to the relocation, the relocating parent cannot simply move while the case is pending and sort out the legal issues afterward.
The statute is explicit on this point. When an objection has been filed, the relocating parent may not relocate pending the final hearing unless the court issues an order authorizing temporary relocation. Moving without that order is a violation of the statute, and courts treat it seriously.
The consequences of relocating without authorization include the possibility that the court will order the child returned to the original location pending the final hearing. Courts have done this in cases where a parent moved without authorization, even when the relocation ultimately had merit, because the unauthorized move demonstrated willingness to violate court orders and to act unilaterally in a way that affects the child.
A parent who has already moved without authorization before consulting with an attorney is in a more difficult position than one who has not yet moved. The options are different, the procedural posture is complicated, and the court’s initial impression of the relocating parent is already negatively affected.
The correct approach is to file the petition for relocation and, if the move is genuinely time-sensitive, to file a simultaneous motion for temporary authorization to relocate pending the final hearing. Courts can issue temporary orders in relocation cases when there is a genuine and urgent reason for the move that cannot wait for the full hearing.
A Tampa divorce attorney who is advising a parent whose job offer or other opportunity requires a quick decision will assess whether a motion for temporary relocation authorization is appropriate and what the court is likely to do with it, because the decision about whether to move before the final order should be made with full legal advice, not on the parent’s own judgment.
The Objection: What the Non-Relocating Parent Must Do
For the non-relocating parent who wants to stop or limit a proposed relocation, the procedural requirements are equally important.
The objection must be filed within thirty days of service of the notice of intended relocation. The objection must be filed with the court and served on the relocating parent. Filing an objection that is not served on the other parent, or serving an objection without filing it with the court, is procedurally defective.
The objection should address the specific reasons the non-relocating parent opposes the move, the impact of the proposed relocation on the child’s best interests, and the non-relocating parent’s position on the proposed revised parenting plan. An objection that simply says “I object” without any substantive content is technically timely but provides little basis for the court to understand the non-relocating parent’s position.
The non-relocating parent should also serve a request for a hearing at the same time as the objection, because the statute requires the court to hold a hearing on the relocation petition after an objection is filed.
A divorce lawyer in Tampa representing a non-relocating parent will file a substantive objection that lays out the legal and factual basis for the opposition, requests a hearing, and positions the client well for the contested proceeding to follow.
What Courts Actually Look For at the Relocation Hearing
When the case proceeds to a hearing, the court applies the statutory factors to determine whether the proposed relocation serves the child’s best interests. Understanding what courts find persuasive on each side of the relocation question helps both parents prepare effectively.
Courts respond positively to relocating parents who have concrete, documented reasons for the move: an offer letter from a specific employer, documentation of a significantly better compensation package, evidence of family support at the new location, or other specific and verifiable reasons. Vague statements about a fresh start or wanting to be in a different city without concrete supporting evidence are less persuasive.
Courts respond positively to proposed revised parenting plans that are detailed, realistic, and that demonstrate genuine commitment to preserving the child’s relationship with the non-relocating parent. A parenting plan that proposes extended summer visits, holiday schedules that work logistically, and a transportation arrangement that is actually feasible is more persuasive than a general statement that the non-relocating parent will see the child during breaks.
Courts respond positively to non-relocating parents who have demonstrated consistent and meaningful involvement with the child before the relocation dispute arose. A parent who has exercised timesharing regularly, attended school events and medical appointments, and been an active presence in the child’s life has a stronger position in opposing a relocation than one whose involvement has been sporadic.
Courts respond negatively to parents who moved first and sought forgiveness later, to parents who appear to be using the relocation primarily to limit the other parent’s access rather than for genuine personal or professional reasons, and to parents on either side who demonstrate that their primary concern is their own interests rather than the child’s wellbeing.
A Tampa divorce lawyer who regularly handles relocation cases understands how Hillsborough County judges approach this analysis and can advise specifically on what the court is likely to find persuasive in the particular facts of the case.
Frequently Asked Questions
What if I give the required notice but the other parent does not respond within thirty days?
If the non-relocating parent does not file an objection within thirty days of being properly served with the notice of intended relocation, the statute provides that the court shall treat the relocation as agreed to by the non-relocating parent. This does not mean the relocation is automatically approved without any court involvement; the relocating parent still needs to submit an order to the court. But the non-relocating parent who misses the thirty-day deadline has lost significant procedural ground. The lesson is that a notice of intended relocation must be treated as an urgent legal document requiring immediate attention.
Can I include a friend or family member as a witness when I serve the notice?
The notice of intended relocation must be served by certified mail, return receipt requested, or by personal service in the manner provided for service of process under Florida law. Having a friend or family member hand-deliver the notice does not satisfy the service requirements unless that person qualifies as a process server under Florida law. Improper service can result in the thirty-day response period never beginning to run, which creates procedural complications. Using a certified mail return receipt or a licensed process server are the recommended methods.
What if the other parent agrees now but later objects after I have already moved?
This is one of the most common and most painful scenarios in relocation cases. A verbal agreement from the other parent provides no legal protection. If you have moved in reliance on a verbal agreement that is later retracted, you are in the position of having relocated without a court order. The other parent can seek to have the child returned to the original location pending litigation, and the unauthorized relocation will be viewed negatively by the court. The only way to protect against this scenario is to have a written agreement that is ratified by the court before the move occurs.
Does the relocation statute apply if there is only an informal custody arrangement, not a court order?
The relocation statute by its terms applies to parties subject to a court order regarding timesharing. If there is no court order, the statute does not technically apply in the same procedural sense. However, moving with a child without notifying the other parent, or placing the child more than fifty miles from the other parent without agreement, can still result in emergency legal proceedings. A parent who acts unilaterally in moving a child without a formal arrangement in place may face an emergency motion for return of the child. Establishing a formal court order before relocating is strongly advisable, and consulting with a Florida divorce attorney before any move is always the right step.
How long does a contested relocation case typically take in Hillsborough County?
The timeline varies depending on the complexity of the case and the court’s schedule. After an objection is filed, the court is required to set the matter for an expedited hearing, but what constitutes expedited in practice depends on the court’s docket. A simple contested relocation case might be heard within a few months. A more complex case with discovery, expert witnesses, and multiple hearings can take six months to a year or longer. If the relocating parent needs to move quickly because of a time-sensitive opportunity, a motion for temporary authorization to relocate pending the final hearing is the appropriate mechanism for addressing that urgency.
What if my child’s school is significantly better at the new location? Is that enough to justify relocation?
Educational opportunity is one of the factors courts consider in the relocation analysis, and documented evidence that the school at the new location is significantly better for this particular child’s needs can be relevant. However, it is rarely sufficient by itself to justify a contested relocation, particularly if the child is already in a good school situation and has established social connections. Courts weigh educational opportunity against the disruption to the child’s existing life, the impact on the relationship with the non-relocating parent, and all of the other statutory factors. A comprehensive case for relocation that includes educational opportunity among several strong factors is more persuasive than one that relies on it alone.
What happens to child support if the relocation changes the timesharing arrangement?
A significant change in the timesharing arrangement resulting from an authorized relocation can affect the child support calculation under Florida’s guidelines. Florida’s child support guidelines include an adjustment for the number of overnight stays each parent has with the child, and if the relocation converts one parent from a roughly equal timesharing arrangement to a long-distance visiting arrangement, the overnight stay numbers change significantly, which can affect the support calculation. When a relocation order modifies the parenting plan, a child support modification may be appropriate as well, and the parties or the court should address this as part of the relocation order.
Florida Statute 61.13001 is one of the most detailed procedural frameworks in Florida family law, and parents who try to navigate it without fully understanding its requirements consistently run into problems that are expensive and sometimes impossible to fix. For Tampa area parents who are considering a move, who have received a notice of intended relocation from a co-parent, or who are already in a contested relocation proceeding, working with a Tampa divorce lawyer who handles these cases as a regular part of their practice is the most reliable way to ensure the statute is followed correctly and the child’s best interests are genuinely protected.
Written by Damien McKinney, Founding Partner
Damien McKinney is the Founding Partner of The McKinney Law Group Family & Divorce Lawyers, bringing nearly two decades of experience to complex marital and family law matters. He is licensed in both Florida and North Carolina and has been repeatedly recognized as a Rising Star by Super Lawyers.