Exclusive, Continuing Jurisdiction Over Florida Custody Determinations
In the recent case of Sosa v. Pena, the Third District Court of Appeal addressed jurisdictional issues related to child custody determinations. The Court reiterated that a Florida court that has made a child custody determination retains exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over that determination until both parents and the children no longer reside in Florida or have a significant connection to Florida.
In Sosa v. Pena, the parties were married and had two minor children. In November 2015, the trial court entered a final judgment dissolving their marriage, establishing that the trial court had jurisdiction over the action, and ratifying the parties’ Parenting Plan. A dependency case later ensued, and in August of 2019, the dependency court temporarily placed the children with the mother in Texas. In March of 2020, the father filed a supplemental petition to modify parental responsibility and timesharing. The dependency court subsequently awarded the father supervised monthly visitation, ordering the parties to alternate flying between Florida and Texas each month and relinquished jurisdiction over the action.
The mother filed a motion to dismiss the father’s petition for lack of jurisdiction. The trial court denied her motion finding that the Florida court had exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over its child custody determination. The Third District of Appeal upheld the trial court’s denial of her motion.
Pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, a Florida court that has made a child custody determination has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over the determination until:
A court of this state determines that the child, the child’s parents, and any person acting as a parent do not have a significant connection with this state and that substantial evidence is no longer available in this state concerning the child’s care, protection, training, and personal relationships; or
A court of this state or a court of another state determines that the child, the child’s parent, and any person acting as a parent do not presently reside in this state.
See Fla. Stat. §61.515.
The Third District Court of Appeal found that it was undisputed that the Florida trial court made a custody determination in November 2015 and that the father remained a Florida resident with significant connections to this state. It held that “the dependency court’s temporary placement of the children with the mother in Texas did not relinquish Florida’s jurisdiction over the case—particularly where the dependency court relinquished its own jurisdiction over the action for the trial court to rule on the father’s petition.” It emphasized a prior case in which the Florida Supreme Court used strong language, holding that the UCCJEA does not operate to divest a court of continuing jurisdiction “unless virtually all contacts have been lost with the forum state.”
Thus, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of the mother’s motion to dismiss, with the Florida court maintaining exclusive, continuing jurisdiction of its custody determination.
