“Any and all persons required to take the 4-hour Parent Education and Family Stabilization course may attend the parenting class online or via distance learning without need of any motion seeking, or order granting, permission to do so.”

Father completed the course online on September 9, 2024. The Judge’s own published rule authorized it. Five months later, the Judge’s own order found the certificate “does not appear from the docket.”

14 mandatory legal requirements. 14 absent. 847 days. 5 hearing sessions. Zero written parenting findings from any of them. The question is not whether these requirements exist - they are in § 61.13, in the Florida Constitution, and in 12 controlling U.S. Supreme Court decisions. The question is why not one of them has been satisfied.

10 of 12 issues Father raised in 69 minutes
have never been addressed in any written order
in 847 days of proceedings.

The one issue the Court did address -
it agreed Father was right.
That is what ‘GRANTED’ means.

This email exists in the Judicial Automated Workflow System. It was read by the Court the same day. It was treated as a formal motion. It was granted. It is now part of the official record of this case - and it documents, in Father’s own words sent before the hearing, every constitutional and procedural failure this presentation has shown slide by slide.

This is the same pattern that runs through this case. Father documents something. The record confirms it. Nothing changes. The February 3 order said the certificate wasn’t there - the docket confirmed it was. The June 2 order found no ability to pay - the enforcement posture confirmed it continued anyway. Father’s email said 48 hours was insufficient - the Court confirmed it and granted the continuance. In every instance: Father was right. In every instance: nothing changed.

The “5th hour” was said on Day 732. By April 2, 2026 it will be Day 861 - Hour 20,664. Under SB 1128, this entire case should have had a temporary parenting plan by Day 60 - Hour 1,440. The “5th hour” represents 0.025% of the total hours of separation - 5 hours out of 20,328. The other 20,323 hours passed without a single written parenting finding. The judge described the symptom of the violation as its justification.

These are not Father's accusations. These are the Judge's own Practice Preferences - published January 8, 2025 - violated by the party who benefited from 847 days of delay, in the Judge's own courtroom, under his own rules. The exhibit binder requirement exists to prevent exactly what happened. The ex parte rule exists to prevent exactly what was sent. The mediation consent requirement SB 1128 now mandates exists because of exactly how mediation was used here.

The Florida Legislature looked at cases like this one.

They saw fathers separated from children for years without written findings.

They saw mediation used as a blocking mechanism by the party who benefited from delay.

They saw a default rule that let courts stay silent on parenting while enforcing finances with precision.

They saw the “5th hour” problem - not the 5 hearing hours, but the 20,000 hours before them that produced nothing for the children.

And they passed SB 1128.

They said: parenting hearings within 30 days. Parenting plans within 60 days. Enforcement hearings within 5 business days. Mediation only with both parties’ consent. The default rule that made 847 days of silence legally sustainable - repealed. And starting in 2027 - every court in Florida reports compliance publicly to the Legislature every year.

SB 1128 does not apply to this case retroactively.

But the rights it now codifies with deadlines and consequences - frequent and continuing contact, equal timesharing presumption, written findings, no unilateral mediation gates - were not created by SB 1128. They existed in § 61.13 and in the Constitution before this case was filed.

SB 1128 is the Legislature’s written acknowledgment that those rights were being violated in cases exactly like this one - and that the system needed enforceable, public, timed mandates to protect them.

Every item on this list corresponds to a documented gap in the record - supported by Exhibits 1 through 40 and the Court’s own orders. None of these requests require new evidence. They require this Court to address what is already in the record but has never been reduced to a written finding.

Where the Money Went
$72,231 Billed  -  $0 Produced for the Children  -  $0 Father’s Total Spent on Attorney

Two Systems. One Case. Opposite Results.
Every enforcement objective was met. Every child welfare objective was not addressed.

What Never Happened
Every zero in this record is sourced. Not one was contested. Not one was explained in writing.

One Father. Two Sons.
861 Days.

848 Days as of March 20, 2026  •  861 Days at April 2 Hearing  •  20,352 Hours of Separation  •  0 Times Father Denied Child Support

B.M.B., age 11  •  B.R.B., age 7  •  April 2, 2026  •  Courtroom 421