Florida Statute 88.6071 - 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

F.S. 88.6071

88.6071 Contest of registration or enforcement.—

(1) A party contesting the validity or enforcement of a registered support order or seeking to vacate the registration has the burden of proving one or more of the following defenses:

(a) The issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction over the contesting party;

(b) The order was obtained by fraud;

(d) The issuing tribunal has stayed the order pending appeal;

(e) There is a defense under the law of this state to the remedy sought;

(f) Full or partial payment has been made;

(g) The statute of limitation under s. 88.6041 precludes enforcement of some or all of the alleged arrearages; or

(h) The alleged controlling order is not the controlling order.

(2) If a party presents evidence establishing a full or partial defense under subsection (1), a tribunal may stay enforcement of a registered support order, continue the proceeding to permit production of additional relevant evidence, and issue other appropriate orders. An uncontested portion of the registered support order may be enforced by all remedies available under the law of this state.

(3) If the contesting party does not establish a defense under subsection (1) to the validity or enforcement of a registered support order, the registering tribunal shall issue an order confirming the order.

History.—s. 6, ch. 96-189; s. 50, ch. 2011-92.

F.S. 88.6071 on Google Scholar

F.S. 88.6071 on CourtListener

Amendments to 88.6071

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 88.6071

Total Results: 7

Florida Dept. of Revenue v. Diaz

647 F.3d 1073, 2011 WL 3117875

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 27, 2011 | Docket: 1890989

Cited 33 times | Published

been made") (enacted in Florida at Fla. Stat. § 88.6071(1)(f) and in Virginia at Va.Code Ann. § 20-88

Wellington v. Dept. of Revenue

708 So. 2d 1040, 1998 WL 204836

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 29, 1998 | Docket: 279152

Cited 4 times | Published

tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction over him. § 88.6071(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997). FARMER and STEVENSON

Logan v. Logan

920 So. 2d 796, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 1994, 2006 WL 357884

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 17, 2006 | Docket: 64842376

Cited 1 times | Published

the burden of proving any applicable defenses. § 88.6071(l)(a)-(g), Fla. Stat. (2002). He did not meet

Department of Revenue v. Ortiz

84 So. 3d 1206, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 5568, 2012 WL 1192094

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 2012 | Docket: 60306627

Published

... (b) The order was obtained by fraud....” § 88.6071(1) Fla. Stat. (2010). Here, the former husband

Department of Revenue v. Marchines

974 So. 2d 1085, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 3848, 2007 WL 777507

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 16, 2007 | Docket: 64853926

Published

s. 88.6071. (Emphasis added.) Pursuant to section 88.6071(1)(3), Mr. Marchines asserted “a defense under

Houston v. Maglio

845 So. 2d 971, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 7963, 2003 WL 21180332

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 21, 2003 | Docket: 64822936

Published

petition to register the Michigan order was denied. § 88.6071(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1998). Armed with this order

Keeton v. Keeton

807 So. 2d 186, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1741, 2002 WL 232801

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 19, 2002 | Docket: 64812453

Published

for further proceedings in accordance with section 88.6071(3), Florida Statutes (2000). BOOTH, WEBSTER