61.122

Parenting plan recommendation; presumption of psychologist’s good faith; prerequisite to parent’s filing suit; award of fees, costs, reimbursement.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

61.122 Parenting plan recommendation; presumption of psychologist’s good faith; prerequisite to parent’s filing suit; award of fees, costs, reimbursement.—

(1) A psychologist who has been appointed by the court to develop a parenting plan recommendation in a dissolution of marriage, a case of domestic violence, or a paternity matter involving the relationship of a child and a parent, including time-sharing of children, is presumed to be acting in good faith if the psychologist’s recommendation has been reached under standards that a reasonable psychologist would use to develop a parenting plan recommendation.

(2) An administrative complaint against a court-appointed psychologist which relates to a parenting plan recommendation conducted by the psychologist may not be filed anonymously. The individual who files an administrative complaint must include in the complaint his or her name, address, and telephone number. Such an administrative complaint may not be filed until the complainant has moved to disqualify the selection of the psychologist pursuant to subsection (3).

(3) A parent who desires to disqualify the selection of the court-appointed psychologist or file an administrative complaint against the court-appointed psychologist who has acted in good faith in developing a parenting plan recommendation must petition the judge who is presiding over the dissolution of marriage, case of domestic violence, or paternity matter involving the relationship of a child and a parent, including time-sharing of children, to appoint an alternative psychologist. Upon the parent’s showing of good cause, the court shall appoint another psychologist. The court shall determine who is responsible for all court costs and attorney fees associated with making such an appointment.

(4) In any supplemental legal action filed against a court-appointed psychologist based upon his or her participation in a dissolution of marriage, case of domestic violence, or paternity matter involving the relationship of a child and a parent, including time-sharing of children, the claimant is responsible for all reasonable costs and reasonable attorney fees associated with the supplemental action for both parties if the psychologist is held not liable. If the psychologist is held liable in civil court, the psychologist must pay all reasonable costs and reasonable attorney’s fees for the claimant.

History.—s. 1, ch. 2003-112; s. 7, ch. 2008-61; s. 4, ch. 2009-21; s. 1, ch. 2025-80.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2014–2026 · leading case: Lori A. Ford v. Michael Withers Ford

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lori A. Ford v. Michael Withers Ford (2014) fladistctapp · cites it 6× “13(2), (3), I also submit section 61.122, Florida Statutes (2012), lends support to the notion that the legislature intended for courts to have authority to order parents to attend therapy or counseling when necessary to protect the best interest of children.”

ROBERTO ESTAPE v. STANLEY B. SEIDMAN, PH.D. and STANLEY B. SEIDMAN PH.D., P.A. (2019) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “For instance, under section 61.122, Florida Statutes (2012), regarding the establishment of a parenting plan, a psychologist who is appointed to develop a plan, including a time-sharing arrangement, is presumed to be acting in good faith.”

Central Florida Psychological Consultants, Inc, and W. Steven Saunders v. Jon Comas (2026) fladistctapp · cites it 17× “§ 61.122(4), Fla. Stat. 3 Of course, when interpreting Florida statutes, our “task is to give effect to the words that the legislature has employed in the 3 Section 61.”

— 61.122(4) — 1 case

Central Florida Psychological Consultants, Inc, and W. Steven Saunders v. Jon Comas (2026) fladistctapp “§ 61.122(4), Fla. Stat. 3 Of course, when interpreting Florida statutes, our “task is to give effect to the words that the legislature has employed in the 3 Section 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.