Florida Statute 88.2051 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 88
UNIFORM INTERSTATE FAMILY SUPPORT ACT

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 88.2051

88.2051 Continuing exclusive jurisdiction.—

(1) A tribunal of this state that has issued a child support order consistent with the law of this state has and shall exercise continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify its child support order if the order is the controlling order and:

(a) At the time of the filing of a request for modification, this state is the residence of the obligor, the individual obligee, or the child for whose benefit the support order is issued; or

(b) Even if this state is not the residence of the obligor, the individual obligee, or the child for whose benefit the support order is issued, the parties consent in a record or in open court that the tribunal of this state may continue to exercise jurisdiction to modify its order.

(2) A tribunal of this state that has issued a child support order consistent with the law of this state may not exercise continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify the order if:

(a) All of the parties who are individuals file consent in a record with the tribunal of this state that a tribunal of another state that has jurisdiction over at least one of the parties who is an individual or that is located in the state of residence of the child may modify the order and assume continuing, exclusive jurisdiction; or

(b) Its order is not the controlling order.

(3) If a tribunal of another state has issued a child support order pursuant to this act or a law substantially similar to this act which modifies a child support order of a tribunal of this state, tribunals of this state shall recognize the continuing, exclusive jurisdiction of the tribunal of the other state.

(4) A tribunal of this state that lacks continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify a child support order may serve as an initiating tribunal to request a tribunal of another state to modify a support order issued in that state.

(5) A temporary support order issued ex parte or pending resolution of a jurisdictional conflict does not create continuing exclusive jurisdiction in the issuing tribunal.

History.—s. 2, ch. 96-189; s. 16, ch. 97-170; s. 9, ch. 2011-92.

F.S. 88.2051 on Google Scholar

F.S. 88.2051 on Casetext

Amendments to 88.2051

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 88.2051

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 88.2051.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 88.2051

Total Results: 20

Lamancusa v. DOR

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2018-06-25T00:53:00-07:00

Snippet: jurisdiction.” See 28 U.S.C. § 1738B(d) (2012); § 88.2051, Fla. Stat. (2013); Trissler, 987 So. 2d at 210…jurisdiction over the order. 28 U.S.C. § 1738B(d); § 88.2051(1), Fla. Stat.; Trissler, 987 So. 2d at 210. However…210 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1738B(e)(2)(A), (B); § 88.2051, Fla. Stat.). In the instant case, New

Ivko v. Ger

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2017-12-19T23:53:00-08:00

Snippet: Section 88.2051 of the UIFSA controls the outcome of this issue. Section 88.2051(1)(a) mandates…support order was issued or, pursuant to section 88.2051(2)(a), until all of the parties who are individuals…before the effective date of the modification. § 88.2051(3), Fla. Stat. (2017). There is nothing in the …assume continuing jurisdiction pursuant to section 88.2051(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2017).3 See also Sootin

Pulkkinen v. Pulkkinen

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2013-11-26T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 127 So. 3d 738, 2013 WL 6171269, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 18794

Snippet: modify.”4 See, e.g., §§ 88.6111(l)(b), 88.6131(1), 88.2051(2). Those requirements include the petitioner’s

Sootin v. Sootin

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2010-08-04T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 41 So. 3d 993, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 11276, 2010 WL 3023361

Snippet: the existence of the support obligation." § 88.2051(6) (emphasis added). The correct procedure under

Trissler v. Trissler

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2008-07-25T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 987 So. 2d 209

Snippet: Specifically, section 88.2051(1), Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part: 88.2051. Continuing exclusive…issuing the order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1738B(d); § 88.2051(1), Fla. Stat. (2007). But, the issuing state loses…28 U.S.C. § 1738B(e)(2)(A) & (B);[2] § 88.2051, Fla. Stat. (2007);[3]see also Gropper v. Gropper

Bouquety v. Bouquety

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2006-06-28T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 933 So. 2d 610

Snippet: resolution of this case requires us to construe section 88.2051 of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA…located in a foreign country is governed by sections 88.2051(2) and (3) of the Florida Statutes.[2] Insofar … amounts accruing before the modification[.] § 88.2051(2)-(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2000). A plain reading of… accruing before the modification." See § 88.2051(3), Fla. Stat. (2000). We also reject the respondent

Mani v. Mani

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2006-05-17T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 927 So. 2d 1087, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 7760, 2006 WL 1328952

Snippet: (2004), the statute applied in Spalding. See § 88.2051(6), Fla. Stat. (2004). Brenda contends that the

Strommen v. Strommen

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2006-04-28T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 927 So. 2d 176

Snippet: of the child support payments." See also § 88.2051, Fla. Stat. (2000). Section 61.13(2)(c) provides

Spalding v. Spalding

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2005-08-05T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 907 So. 2d 1270

Snippet: assumed continuing exclusive jurisdiction. See § 88.2051(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). For purposes of the choice

Spalding v. Spalding

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2004-11-19T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 886 So. 2d 1075, 2004 WL 2623956

Snippet: defined term under UIFSA, is described in section 88.2051, Florida Statutes (2003). While the statute defines…bound by the terms of that legislation. Sections 88.2051, 88.2061(3) and 88.6031, Florida Statutes (2003…consents of the affected individuals are filed. See § 88.2051(1)(a) and (b), Fla. Stat. (2003). Provisions governing…modification of child support orders are found in section 88.2051(2), (3) and (4). Under subsection (6) of that statute…the existence of the support obligation. See § 88.2051(6), Fla. Stat. (2003); see also Vinnik v. Vinnik

Houston v. Maglio

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2003-05-21T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 845 So. 2d 971, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 7963, 2003 WL 21180332

Snippet: order. § 552.1224(l)(a), Mich. Stat. (2002); § 88.2051(4), Fla. Stat. (2002).1 Since Michigan lacks “continuing…entered, will be deemed the controlling order. §§ 88.2051(l)(a) 88.2071(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2002).2 The previously

Vinnik v. Vinnik

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2002-12-17T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 831 So. 2d 1271

Snippet: over that order under the law of that state. § 88.2051(6), Fla. Stat. (2001); § 580-205(f), N.Y. Family

Department of Revenue v. Cascella

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2000-03-16T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 751 So. 2d 1273

Snippet: tribunal controls and must be so recognized. Section 88.2051 of Florida's UIFSA defines continuing exclusive

Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Sloan v. Sloan

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1999-09-17T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 743 So. 2d 1131

Snippet: currently resides in Marion County, Florida. Section 88.2051, Florida Statutes, part of the UIFSA, provides

Urso v. Urso

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1999-01-27T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 724 So. 2d 1253, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 667, 1999 WL 30686

Snippet: had jurisdiction to modify its own order. See § 88.2051(l)-(4), Fla. *1254Stat. (1997)(setting forth the

Green v. State

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1991-04-22T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 578 So. 2d 447, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3645, 1991 WL 60006

Snippet: of incarceration imposed for sale of cocaine (88-2051), which offense antedated the amendment, inappropriate…3232, but we REVERSE and REMAND his sentence for 88-2051 with directions that the court re-sentence him

Sanders v. State

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1989-12-20T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 553 So. 2d 795, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7298, 1989 WL 154952

Snippet: and LEHAN and PARKER, JJ., concur. No. 88-02051 District Court of Appeal of Florida fladistctapp

Weller v. State

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1989-08-10T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 547 So. 2d 997, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1904, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4602, 1989 WL 90486

Snippet: ERVIN and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur. No. 88-2051 District Court of Appeal of Florida fladistctapp

Bocchino v. Braner

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1989-07-13T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 546 So. 2d 1121, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1677, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 3924, 1989 WL 75726

Snippet: REMANDED. COBB and SHARP, JJ., concur. No. 88-2051 District Court of Appeal of Florida fladistctapp

Tampa Associates, Ltd. v. Miami Elevator Co.

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1989-06-20T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 545 So. 2d 458

Snippet: COMPANY, A Delaware Corporation, Appellee. No. 88-2051. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District…reversed for further consistent proceedings. 88-2051 District Court of Appeal of Florida fladistctapp