Background
After their Florida marriage dissolution, Robert J. Powell and Christina M. Powell litigated modifications to parental responsibilities. The final judgment initially gave Former Husband majority timesharing, but was later amended to give Former Wife majority timesharing. An agreed order permitted Former Wife, then in the military, to relocate with the parties’ three children to North Carolina.
While competing custody-modification petitions were pending, including Former Husband’s request to modify child support, Former Wife moved under section 61.520, Florida Statutes, to transfer the pending matters to North Carolina as the more convenient forum. The circuit court granted the motion after a non-evidentiary hearing, citing the children’s residence in North Carolina, the asserted North Carolina evidence, and Former Wife’s North Carolina counsel. Its order did not address child support.
The Court’s Holding
The Fourth District affirmed the transfer of jurisdiction over modifications concerning child custody, timesharing, parental decision-making, and parental responsibility. Section 61.520 permits a Florida court with continuing jurisdiction over child-custody determinations to decline to exercise that jurisdiction when another state is the more appropriate forum, and the appellate court found no abuse of discretion in the circuit court’s decision to do so here.
But the court reversed insofar as the transfer order failed to retain Florida’s continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over child-support modification. Child support is excluded from the statutory definition of a child-custody determination, and section 88.2051 governs support modification. Because Former Husband continued to reside in Florida, Florida retained continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify the controlling support order. The case was remanded for an amended transfer order expressly preserving that jurisdiction.
Key Takeaways
- A custody-forum transfer under Florida’s UCCJEA does not itself transfer jurisdiction over child-support modification.
- Florida may decline jurisdiction over custody modifications when another state is a more convenient forum under section 61.520.
- When an obligor, obligee, or child remains a Florida resident as specified in section 88.2051, Florida retains continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify its controlling support order.
Why It Matters
The decision separates the jurisdictional rules for custody and support in interstate family litigation. A court transferring custody-related modification issues must clearly distinguish those issues from child-support modification and preserve Florida jurisdiction where UIFSA requires it.