An earlier guide on this site covered what Florida divorce actually requires — equitable distribution, the 2023 alimony reform, timesharing, and the child support formula. What that guide didn’t cover is what happens after the divorce is final and one parent wants to move somewhere else with the child. That situation is governed by its own statute, with its own definitions, its own deadlines, and its own default outcome if the other parent doesn’t respond — and getting the process wrong can matter as much as the underlying reason for the move.
“Relocation” Has a Specific Legal Definition
Not every move triggers this statute. Under F.S. 61.13001(1)(e), “relocation” means a change in the principal residence of a parent or other person, measured from that person’s residence at the time of the last time-sharing order (or the filing of the current action), where the new location is “at least 50 miles from that residence, and for at least 60 consecutive days” — not counting a temporary absence for vacation, education, or a child’s health care. A move across town, or a move that’s genuinely temporary, generally doesn’t trigger the formal relocation process. A move to another state, or 60+ miles away within Florida, generally does.
If Both Parents Agree, It’s Simpler
Under F.S. 61.13001(2), if the parents and everyone else entitled to access or time-sharing with the child agree to the move, they can handle it by signing a written agreement that reflects consent, defines a revised access or time-sharing schedule for the non-relocating parent, and describes any necessary transportation arrangements. If there’s already an existing case or order involving the child, the parties can seek court ratification of that agreement without a hearing — unless someone requests one in writing within 10 days of the agreement being filed. Absent a timely hearing request, the statute presumes the relocation is in the child’s best interest and lets the court ratify the agreement without an evidentiary hearing.
If There’s No Agreement, a Formal Petition Is Required
Where the parents don’t agree, F.S. 61.13001(3) requires the relocating parent to file a sworn petition to relocate and serve it on the other parent and everyone else entitled to access or time-sharing. The petition has to include specific information: the intended new address (if known), the moving date, “a detailed statement of the specific reasons for the proposed relocation” — including attaching a written job offer if that’s the basis for the move — and a proposed revised time-sharing schedule with transportation arrangements. If the petition doesn’t include a workable revised schedule and there isn’t good cause for the omission, the statute says it renders the petition “legally insufficient.”
The petition also has to include a specific statutory warning, printed in capital letters, informing the other parent that a written objection has to be filed and served within 20 days — and that if no objection is filed, the relocation will be allowed, without a hearing, unless it isn’t in the child’s best interest.
What Happens If the Other Parent Doesn’t Respond
This is the detail most likely to catch someone off guard on either side of a relocation dispute. Under F.S. 61.13001(3)(d), if the other parent (and anyone else entitled to access or time-sharing) fails to timely file a written objection, “it is presumed that the relocation is in the best interest of the child and that the relocation should be allowed” — and the court is directed to enter an order adopting the petition’s proposed schedule, potentially without an evidentiary hearing at all. Missing the 20-day window isn’t a minor procedural slip; it can functionally decide the outcome. Conversely, if a timely objection is filed, the relocating parent can’t move the child without court permission and has to proceed to a hearing or trial.
The statute also addresses what happens if a parent relocates without following this process at all: F.S. 61.13001(3)(e) subjects that parent to contempt and related proceedings to compel the child’s return, and allows the unauthorized move to be used against them in later time-sharing or parenting-plan decisions — including as a basis for the court to order the child’s temporary or permanent return, and as grounds to require the relocating parent to cover the other parent’s related travel and legal expenses.
How a Contested Relocation Is Actually Decided
Where the case is genuinely contested, F.S. 61.13001(7) states there’s no automatic presumption for or against the move — the court evaluates a specific list of factors instead, including: the quality and duration of the child’s relationship with each parent and other significant people in the child’s life; the child’s age, developmental needs, and the likely impact of the move; whether a substitute time-sharing arrangement could realistically preserve the relationship with the non-relocating parent, given logistics and finances; the child’s own preference, weighted by age and maturity; whether the move would meaningfully improve quality of life for the parent and child, including financially or educationally; each parent’s reasons for seeking or opposing the move; whether the relocation is sought in good faith; and any history of domestic violence or substance abuse by either parent.
Under F.S. 61.13001(8), the parent seeking to relocate carries the initial burden — proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the move is in the child’s best interest. If that burden is met, it shifts to the objecting parent to show, also by a preponderance of the evidence, that the relocation isn’t in the child’s best interest.
So, What Actually Determines the Outcome?
Two things end up mattering more than almost anything else in a Florida relocation case: whether the move genuinely meets the 50-mile, 60-day definition that triggers the statute at all, and whether the other parent responds to a filed petition within the 20-day window. Everything downstream of those two facts — whether it’s an uncontested ratification, a default order adopting the relocating parent’s proposed schedule, or a full evidentiary hearing weighing the statutory factors — flows from how those procedural questions play out, independent of how strong either parent’s underlying reasons for wanting or opposing the move might be.
Frequently Asked Questions
How far does a move have to be to count as “relocation” under Florida law?
Under F.S. 61.13001(1)(e), relocation means a change of principal residence at least 50 miles from the prior residence, lasting at least 60 consecutive days (not counting temporary absences for vacation, education, or health care).
What happens if the other parent doesn’t object to a relocation petition?
Under F.S. 61.13001(3)(d), if no written objection is timely filed, the law presumes the relocation is in the child’s best interest, and the court can enter an order allowing it — adopting the schedule proposed in the petition — without an evidentiary hearing.
How long does the other parent have to object to a relocation petition?
20 days after being served with the petition, per the statutory warning required under F.S. 61.13001(3)(a)7.
Who has the burden of proof in a contested relocation case?
The parent seeking to relocate has the initial burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the move is in the child’s best interest. If that’s met, the burden shifts to the other parent to show it isn’t, under F.S. 61.13001(8).