Florida Statute 88.2061 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 88
UNIFORM INTERSTATE FAMILY SUPPORT ACT

View Entire Chapter

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 CourtListener

Amendments to 88.2061

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 88.2061

Total Results: 2 | Sort by: Relevance | Newest First

Copy

Sootin v. Sootin, 41 So. 3d 993 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010).

Cited 4 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 11276, 2010 WL 3023361

...The correct procedure under UIFSA is to register the spousal support judgment in another state for enforcement there. § 88.3011(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.")....

Copy

Spalding v. Spalding, 886 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).

Cited 2 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2004 WL 2623956

...te. (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. 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....

...Our analysis necessarily begins with the recognition that the Former Husband sought relief from his marital support obligations in the courts of Florida when he registered the Massachusetts divorce judgment in Florida pursuant to UIFSA. Having done so, he is bound by the terms of that legislation. Sections 88.2051, 88.2061(3) and 88.6031, Florida Statutes (2003), three of the provisions of UIFSA implicated by the dispute between the parties in this appeal, lend considerable weight to the Former Wife's position....

...nal of another state having "continuing exclusive jurisdiction" over that order throughout the existence of the support obligation. See § 88.2051(6), Fla. Stat. (2003); see also Vinnik v. Vinnik, 831 So.2d 1271 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Similarly, under section 88.2061(3), a court of Florida that lacks continuing exclusive jurisdiction over a spousal support order may enforce out-of-state spousal support orders, but may not serve as a responding tribunal to modify a spousal support order of another state....

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.