Florida Statute 88.2111 | 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. 88.2111

88.2111 Continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify spousal support order.—

(1) A tribunal of this state issuing a spousal support order consistent with the law of this state has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify the spousal support order throughout the existence of the support obligation.

(2) A tribunal of this state may not modify a spousal support order issued by a tribunal of another state or foreign country having continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over that order under the law of that state or foreign country.

(3) A tribunal of this state that has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a spousal support order may serve as:

(a) An initiating tribunal to request a tribunal of another state to enforce the spousal support order issued in this state; or

(b) A responding tribunal to enforce or modify its own spousal support order.

History.—s. 15, ch. 2011-92.

F.S. 88.2111 on Google Scholar

F.S. 88.2111 on Casetext

Amendments to 88.2111

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 88.2111

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 88.2111.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 88.2111

Total Results: 7

Lavinder v. Bryson

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-21

Snippet: jurisdiction to terminate the alimony requirement. See § 88.2111(2), Fla. Stat. (“A tribunal of this state may not

Lavinder v. Bryson

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-21

Snippet: jurisdiction to terminate the alimony requirement. See § 88.2111(2), Fla. Stat. (“A tribunal of this state may not

Lavinder v. Bryson

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-21

Snippet: jurisdiction to terminate the alimony requirement. See § 88.2111(2), Fla. Stat. (“A tribunal of this state may not

Koenigsberg v. INTERCONTINENTAL INS. COMPANY

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1990-12-28

Citation: 571 So. 2d 578, 1990 WL 211717

Snippet: INTERCONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. No. 88-2111. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Glisson v. Alachua County

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1990-01-12

Citation: 558 So. 2d 1030, 1990 WL 2065

Snippet: of Florida, Inc., Amicus Curiae-Appellees. No. 88-2111. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Travelers Insurance Co. v. Hernandez

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1989-05-02

Citation: 541 So. 2d 1368, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2312

Snippet: PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Harris v. United States Fidelity & Guar. Co., 409 So.2d 1210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Compare Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. v. Cramer, 178 So.2d 581 (Fla.1965).

State v. Avendano

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1989-03-31

Citation: 540 So. 2d 920, 1989 WL 29041

Snippet: Florida, Appellant, v. Julio AVENDANO, Appellee. No. 88-02111. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District