Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 61.10 (2025)
Adjudication of obligation to support spouse or minor child unconnected with dissolution; parenting plan.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
61.10 Adjudication of obligation to support spouse or minor child unconnected with dissolution; parenting plan.—Except when relief is afforded by some other pending civil action or proceeding, a spouse residing in this state apart from his or her spouse and minor child, whether or not such separation is through his or her fault, may obtain an adjudication of obligation to maintain the spouse and minor child, if any. The court shall adjudicate his or her financial obligations to the spouse and child and shall establish the parenting plan for the parties. Such an action does not preclude either party from maintaining any other proceeding under this chapter for other or additional relief at any time.
History.—s. 1, ch. 61-112; s. 16, ch. 67-254; s. 12, ch. 71-241; s. 117, ch. 86-220; s. 321, ch. 95-147; s. 5, ch. 2008-61.
Note.—Former s. 65.101.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1968–2020 · leading case: In Re Fam. Law Rules of Procedure, 663 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 1995).
In Re Fam. Law Rules of Procedure, 663 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 1995). “See section 61.10, Florida Statutes for more information about receiving support unconnected with dissolution of marriage, Appendix 2, for information about child custody and visitation, and Appendix 3, for information about child support.”
Graham v. Graham, 648 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). “In granting the motion to transfer, the trial court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction over the wife's petition for alimony because the same issue regarding spousal support was pending in the Sumter County action. At the same time, prior to transferring the action, the court…”
Beers v. Pub. Health Trust of Dade Cnty., 468 So. 2d 995 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). “Section 61.10, Florida Statutes, permits a spouse to present the issue to a court.”
Dorrity v. Dorrity, 695 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). “On July 18th, appellee filed a petition for custody pursuant to section 61.10, Florida Statutes (1995) and requested an emergency ex parte order for temporary custody of the minor child alleging abuse of the child by appellant.”
Babb v. Begines, 701 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). “Under section 61.10, Florida Statutes (1995), a trial court may establish the primary residence and custody of children between two spouses, unconnected with a dissolution.”
Pate v. Pate, 777 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). “See § 61.10, Fla. Stat. (1999). The petition alleged, among other things, that the mother had left the marital home in Florida and relocated to Ohio with the parties’ infant son.”
Dover v. Dover, 241 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). “This is an interlocutory appeal from an order of the Circuit Court of Broward County striking the counterclaim of defendant-wife in an action brought by her husband under Section 61.10, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. We reverse.”
Florida Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. ex rel. Branscomb v. Branscomb, 597 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). “This petition was authorized by section 61.10, Florida Statutes (1989). On December 12, 1990, the trial court entered a final judgment of separation, giving primary physical residence of the couple’s minor child to Mrs.”
Feldhusen v. Feldhusen, 214 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968). “The appellant argues that the wife should have the same rights as the husband is afforded under § 61.10, Fla.Stat.1967, F. S.A., whereby the husband may bring an action to have the court adjudicate and define his financial obligations to his wife or minor children, or both,…”
Andrew Boukzam v. Jossi Jugo (Fla. 4th DCA 2020). “Although the Second District was unsure whether “the extensive regulation of child support that is statutorily required in a divorce is also essential when the parents are merely subject to a separation order under section 61.10,” the court concluded that it had “no need to…”
Rosen v. Rosen, 306 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). “The appellee-wife contends that under § 61.10, Fla.Stat., she may obtain an adjudication of the obligations of the husband to her, and under § 61.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.