Florida Statute 61.515 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 61
DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE; SUPPORT; TIME-SHARING

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 61.515

61.515 Exclusive, continuing jurisdiction.—

(1) Except as otherwise provided in s. 61.517, a court of this state which has made a child custody determination consistent with s. 61.514 or s. 61.516 has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over the determination until:

(a) A court of this state determines that the child, the child’s parents, and any person acting as a parent do not have a significant connection with this state and that substantial evidence is no longer available in this state concerning the child’s care, protection, training, and personal relationships; or

(b) A court of this state or a court of another state determines that the child, the child’s parent, and any person acting as a parent do not presently reside in this state.

(2) A court of this state which has made a child custody determination and does not have exclusive, continuing jurisdiction under this section may modify that determination only if it has jurisdiction to make an initial determination under s. 61.514.

History.—s. 5, ch. 2002-65.

F.S. 61.515 on Google Scholar

F.S. 61.515 on Casetext

Amendments to 61.515

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 61.515

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 61.515.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 61.515

Total Results: 16

Burgos v. Sequeira, Vargas

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-10-16

Snippet: determination." Beehler, 351 So. 3d at 1260 (quoting § 61.515(1)). A trial court having such jurisdiction may

Kilcrease v. Brown

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-03-06

Snippet: has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction under s. 61.515 or that a court of this state would be a more convenient

Mattingly, Mattingly v. Hatfield

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-02-28

Snippet: exclusive, continuing jurisdiction under s. 61.515 or that a court of this state would be a more

ANTHONY T. LITSCH, III vs JULIE LITSCH N/K/A JULIE MILLS

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2023-10-13

Snippet: parent do not presently reside in this state. § 61.515(1), Fla. Stat. (2022). 3 The legislature’s

PATRICIA MARQUEZ SOSA, etc. v. HECTOR GABRIEL BALZAGA PENA

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-10-26

Snippet: 2 exclusive jurisdiction pursuant to section 61.515, Florida Statutes. The trial court reserved ruling

C.N. v. I.G.C.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-04-29

Snippet: timesharing plans. Pet’r’s Br. 9. (citing §§ 61.13(5), 61.515, Fla. Stat.). But read most generously to the

Destefanis v. Tan

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-08-02

Snippet: directed by sections 61.515 and 61.520, Florida Statutes (2015). Under section 61.515(1), the trial court

London v. London

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2009-10-16

Citation: 32 So. 3d 107, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 15614, 2009 WL 3320189

Snippet: has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction under s. 61.515 or that a court of this state would be a more convenient

Tidwell v. Tidwell

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2008-06-11

Citation: 983 So. 2d 742, 2008 WL 2356871

Snippet: court had lost exclusive jurisdiction under section 61.515, Florida Statutes. We affirm. In January 2000,

McGhee v. Biggs

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2008-02-06

Citation: 974 So. 2d 524, 2008 WL 313589

Snippet: has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction under s. 61.515 or that a court of this state would be a more convenient

Bluestein v. Bluestein

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2007-06-05

Citation: 958 So. 2d 1040, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 8722, 2007 WL 1593247

Snippet: jurisdiction to reach the issue, had it been raised. See § 61.515, Fla. Stat. (2005). We direct the court to strike

Orsi v. Bollella

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2006-10-17

Citation: 939 So. 2d 254, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 17294, 2006 WL 2959151

Snippet: proceed. We conclude that, under sections 61.514, 61.515 and 61.516, the trial court had jurisdiction to

Dileo v. Dileo

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2006-10-06

Citation: 939 So. 2d 181, 2006 WL 2844359

Snippet: of child support (apparently based on sections 61.515 and 61.514, Florida Statutes (2005)), or that the

Steckler v. Steckler

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2006-02-17

Citation: 921 So. 2d 740, 2006 WL 359673

Snippet: conflicting Florida statutes, including section 61.515, Florida Statutes (2005), which grants Florida

McCormick v. Oakes

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2005-03-30

Citation: 899 So. 2d 393, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 4363, 2005 WL 713243

Snippet: protection, training, and personal relationships. § 61.515(l)(a), Fla. Stat. See also Crippen v. Crippen,

Ek v. Miami Daily News, Inc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1962-01-04

Citation: 136 So. 2d 687, 1962 Fla. App. LEXIS 4128

Snippet: PER CURIAM. Affirmed.