NAVIGATING PARENTAL
RELOCATION
By K. Dean Kantaras and Maurice Q. Thurman
W hen a parent moves as a result
of a divorce or separation, it
can be a very stressful and
challenging experience for
parents and their children. However,
when a parent wishes to relocate, special
consideration must be given to the potential
impact on the parent-child relationship and
the best interests of the children involved.
Historically, Florida law offered little
guidance to judges who were deciding
whether one parent should be permitted
to relocate with a child over a long
distance. During this time, there was little
consistency among the various Florida
courts on the issue of relocation.
Fortunately, the Florida legislature
approved a new law, known as the Parental
Relocation with a Child statute, in 2006.
The parental relocation law provides
Florida courts and parents with guidance
on whether one parent should be permitted
to relocate with the child.
The parental relocation law is now
codified under section 61.13001 of the
Florida Statutes. Under this law, a relocation
is generally defined as the change of the
principal residence of a parent. However,
the change of location must be at least
50 miles from the principal residence
and for at least 60 consecutive days. A
relocation does not include a temporary
absence from the principal residence
for a vacation, educational purposes, or
healthcare purposes for the child.
Florida’s parental relocation law does
allow a child to relocate with a parent if
there is written agreement between the
parents. If one of the parents objects to
the other parent relocating with the child,
the law requires the court determine
whether relocation is in the best interest
of the child. The parental relocation law
also requires the court to consider several
factors when deciding whether relocation
is in the best interest of the child, such as:
(1) The reasons the parent is seeking or
opposing the relocation; (2) whether the
relocation will enhance the general quality
of life for both the parent and child; (3)
the age and developmental stage of the
child; (4) the child’s preference, taking into
consideration the age and maturity of the
LAARWT
K. Dean Kantaras, Esq.
142 TAMPA BAY MAGAZINE | MARCH/APRIL 2017
extended periods of time with the father
during the summer and winter breaks and
holidays.”
In light of the trial court’s well-reasoned
decision on the mother’s petition for
relocation, the Third District Court of
Appeal concluded that the trial court’s
decision was a “model of form, content
and judicial conscientiousness.” Therefore,
the mother was permitted to relocate with
the child to California. Valqui v. Rodriguez
is an important case that demonstrates a
judge’s decision-making process when
determining whether a child may relocate
with a parent.
Typically, parental relocation cases
have unique facts that must be raised and
weighed by the court. Courts generally
have broad powers under Florida law
to approve or deny a parent’s request to
relocate with a child away from the other
parent. For more information on parental
relocation law, contact K. Dean Kantaras,
P.A. (727) 781-0000.
Martin v. Robbins is an important
case that demonstrates how supportive
relationships can result in the reduction
or termination of a former spouse’s
alimony obligation. For more information
on Florida alimony law, contact K. Dean
Kantaras, P.A. (727) 781-0000. 9
EDITOR’S NOTE: K. Dean Kantaras has
been licensed to practice law in Florida for
more than 19 years. Mr. Kantaras is the
managing partner of K. Dean Kantaras,
P.A., a firm handling cases in family law and
immigration. Mr. Kantaras is board certified
in marital and family law by the Florida Bar,
a distinction held by less than 1 percent of
all attorneys licensed to practice in Florida.
He is “A” rated by Martindale-Hubbell, the
highest possible rating. He is a member of
the Supreme Court of the United States, the
United States Court of Appeals for the 11th
Circuit and Middle District, The Florida
Bar, and the Clearwater Bar Association.
Maurice Z. Thurman, Esq. is an associate
attorney at the firm. He is a member of the
Florida Bar, Clearwater Bar and Canakaris
Inn of Court. Their offices are located at
3531 Alternate 19, Palm Harbor, 34638,
(727) 781-0000 and 1930 East Bay Drive, Largo,
33771, (727) 544-0000, kantaraslaw.com.
child; (5) the feasibility of preserving the
relationship between the child and the
non-relocating parent; and (6) any history
of substance abuse or domestic violence
by either parent.
Florida courts have applied the
parental relocation law to many cases
since its enactment. In the case of Valqui
v. Rodriguez, Florida’s Third District
Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s
ruling that allowed a mother to relocate
with her child to California. 75 So. 3d 751
(Fla. 3d DCA 2011). In Valqui, the child’s
biological parents resided in Miami-Dade
County, Florida. However, the mother filed
a petition to relocate to California over
the objection of the father. The mother
requested to relocate with the child because
the child’s stepfather was a member of
the U.S. Coast Guard and he had received
travel orders to relocate to California.
The trial court ultimately concluded
that the mother had a legitimate reason
to relocate. This is because the mother
needed to move to California in order for
her husband to maintain employment with
the Coast Guard. The trial court noted that
the mother claimed that “she will have a
better life with the children in California
and be available to the children on a fulltime
basis while her husband works in
the Coast Guard.” The trial court also
noted that “although California is a far
distance away from South Florida, the
mother believes that the child can spend