Sanabria v. Sanabria, 271 So. 3d 1101

Parents divorced in 2013 with shared parental responsibility and timesharing for two minor children. Mother filed a petition (Apr. 2017) to relocate children from Miami to Huntsville, AL.
Petition included statutory 20-day notice advising that failure to timely object would result in relocation being allowed unless not in child’s best interests. Father was personally served and retained counsel but did not file an objection within 20 days; counsel instead sought additional time.
Mother moved for entry of an order allowing relocation based on father’s failure to timely object. The court found "good cause" for the late objection (attributing the failure to father’s counsel), declined to enter the expedited order, and set an evidentiary hearing on the merits.
At the hearing the mother argued the statutory presumption (that relocation is in the child’s best interest when no timely objection is filed) still applied and thus the burden shifted to the father to disprove best interests. The trial court agreed, required the father to proceed first, and granted the relocation.
On appeal the court considered whether the presumption in section 61.13001(3)(d) and the attendant burden-shift apply at a merits hearing after the trial court finds good cause not to enter the expedited order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Mother)	Defendant's Argument (Father)	Held
Whether the statutory presumption in §61.13001(3)(d) that relocation is in the child’s best interest (when no timely objection is filed) carries over to a merits hearing after the court finds good cause not to enter the expedited order, thereby shifting the burden to the non-relocating parent	The presumption survives; father's untimely objection means relocation is presumed in children’s best interest and burden shifts to father to disprove that at the hearing	Once court finds good cause and proceeds to an evidentiary hearing, the presumption no longer applies; mother (proponent) bears burden to prove relocation is in children's best interest under §61.13001(8)	The presumption does not carry over; the mother had the initial burden at the merits hearing and the court erred by shifting the burden to the father

Edwards v. Thomas, 229 So. 3d 277 (Fla. 2017) (statutory construction guides courts to legislative intent)
Milton v. Milton, 113 So. 3d 1040 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (relocation statute interpretation reviewed de novo)
Kephart v. Hadi, 932 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 2006) (statutory interpretation is a legal question)
Ryan v. Ryan, 252 So. 3d 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (describes §61.13001(3)(d) expedited order process absent good cause)
Arthur v. Arthur, 54 So. 3d 454 (Fla. 2010) (best-interests determinations require competent, substantial evidence)