Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Child Custody and Florida Child Support
Once a Florida parenting plan has been entered, generally, a parent cannot move more than 50 miles from his or her current residence without a court order or the written permission of the other parent. This rule is likely in place to avoid the disruption to a time-sharing schedule that is sure to occur if a parent moves too far away. However, even moving within this mileage limit can disrupt the time-sharing schedule, and this may form a basis for modification of a parenting plan. This was an issue in the case Seith v. Seith, 4D21-556 (Fla. 4th DCA March 2, 2022).
When the parties divorced, they entered a parenting plan which granted the mother majority time-sharing. Both parents were ophthalmologists and worked in the same county. Four years after the parenting plan was entered, the mother moved 46 miles from her residence because of a new employment contract. She did not notify the father until after she moved. The father filed a petition for modification, alleging that the mother’s move disrupted his work schedule which was structured around his time-sharing with the parties’ children. The mother filed a counter-petition for modification of child support. After a hearing, the court found that the impact to the father’s work schedule was a substantial, material and unanticipated change in circumstances caused by the mother’s relocation which was also a substantial change. The court granted the father additional overnights in the summer. It also granted the mother’s petition for modification of support. The mother appealed both rulings, arguing it was error to modify the time-sharing, and that the court used incorrect numbers for the new child support ruling.
As to the time-sharing issue, the appellate court found no error in the decision to increase the father’s time-sharing. It held “In this case, rather than restrict the mother’s ability to relocate, the court made a modest adjustment of timesharing. The court found an unanticipated and substantial change in circumstance, as the mother’s change of jobs and necessary relocation was unanticipated. Further, the court found the move constituted a ‘substantial’ and ‘material’ change, finding that mother’s move ‘impede[d] the initial timesharing schedule.’ This caused not only a disruption for the child, but also for the father’s work schedule. Finding it in the child’s best interest not to be shuffled as often between residences, the court made a modest adjustment of the timesharing schedule, which would have the parents ‘spend[ing] less time traveling in order to accommodate the child’s time with each parent, and would allow the child a longer continuous period of time in which to form a better bonding relationship with each parent.’ The evidence supports the court’s determinations.”
As to child support, the appellate court agreed with the mother that there were errors in the trial court’s calculation. First, the trial court assigned to the father a higher amount of overnights than he was actually granted, resulting in the father being ordered to pay less child support than he should actually pay. Second, the trial court erred by not entering an income deduction order for the new support order. It held “Section 61.1301(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2020) states, ‘Upon the entry of an order establishing, enforcing, or modifying an obligation for . . . child support . . . other than a temporary order, the court shall enter a separate order for income deduction if one has not been entered.’ The statute is mandatory. See Dorsett v. Dorsett, 902 So. 2d 947, 953 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (‘It is unambiguous from both the statutory language and its judicial interpretation that every child support order is to be accompanied by an income deduction order.’).”
Last, the appellate court determined it was error for the trial court to assign equal responsibility to both parents for collateral child support expenses such as daycare and uncovered medical expenses. Therefore, the child support provisions were remanded with instructions to correct the errors pointed out in the appeal. Schedule your consultation with a Miami family law attorney to understand how the law may apply to the facts of your case.