Personal Injury Lawyer

Florida Statute 88.2061 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

F.S. 88.2061 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:

Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 88.2061

The 2023 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 88
UNIFORM INTERSTATE FAMILY SUPPORT ACT

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 88.2061

88.2061 Continuing jurisdiction to enforce child support order.—

(1) A tribunal of this state that has issued a child support order consistent with the law of this state may serve as an initiating tribunal to request a tribunal of another state to enforce:

(a) The order if the order is the controlling order and has not been modified by a tribunal of another state that assumed jurisdiction pursuant to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act; or

(b) A money judgment for arrears of support and interest on the order accrued before a determination that an order of a tribunal of another state is the controlling order.

(2) A tribunal of this state having continuing jurisdiction over a support order may act as a responding tribunal to enforce the order.

History.—s. 2, ch. 96-189; s. 10, ch. 2011-92.

F.S. 88.2061 on Google Scholar

F.S. 88.2061 on Casetext

Amendments to 88.2061

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 88.2061

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 88.2061.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

10 Cases from Casetext:Date Descending

U.S. Supreme Court

11th Cir. - Ct. App.11th Cir. - MD FL11th Cir. - ND FL11th Cir. - SD FLFed. Reg.Secondary Sources - All

Sootin v. Sootin
41 So. 3d 993 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010) Cited 2 times
Despite the obvious logic of allowing the two former spouses now living in Tennessee to resolve their dispute there, we must reverse. Under UIFSA, the Miami-Dade court has "continuing exclusive jurisdiction over a spousal support order throughout the existence of the support obligation." § 88.2051(6) (emphasis added). The correct procedure under UIFSA is to register the spousal support judgment in another state for enforcement there. § 88.301 l(2)(c). Even after registration, however, the foreign court must send the case back to the Florida court to consider any modification of the order. § 88.2061( 2) ("A tribunal of this state having continuing exclusive jurisdiction over a support order may act as a responding tribunal to enforce or modify the order."). Under UIFSA, out-of-state courts may enforce Florida spousal support orders but may not modify them. Spalding v. Spalding, 886 So.2d 1075 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Vinnik v. Vinnik 831 So.2d 1271 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). See § 88.6031(3) ("Except as otherwise provided in this article, a tribunal of this state shall recognize and enforce, but may not modify, a registered order if the issuing tribunal had jurisdiction."…
Spalding v. Spalding
886 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004) Cited 2 times
The Former Wife, who opposed any reduction, argued that under section 88.2061(3), Florida Statutes (2003), the Commonwealth of Massachusetts retained exclusive jurisdiction over the alimony order. That statute reads as follows:
Cases from cite.case.law:
SOOTIN, v. SOOTIN,, 41 So. 3d 993 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . . § 88.2061(2) (“A tribunal of this state having continuing exclusive jurisdiction over a support order . . .
SPALDING, v. SPALDING,, 886 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . The Former Wife, who opposed any reduction, argued that under section 88.2061(3), Florida Statutes (2003 . . . Sections 88.2051, 88.2061(3) and 88.6031, Florida Statutes (2003), three of the provisions of UIFSA implicated . . . Similarly, under section 88.2061(3), a court of Florida that lacks continuing exclusive jurisdiction . . .