On April 13-15, 2026, Kayla Rae Reid published text messages from estranged husband Ryan Lochte calling her a "gold digger" and claiming his girlfriend Molly Gillihan is a "ten times better mother" to their three children, per Daily Mail reporting. Reid filed for divorce in March 2025, and under Fla. Stat. § 61.13, such communications can directly affect timesharing determinations in Florida courts.
Key Facts
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| What happened | Kayla Reid publicly released private emails from Ryan Lochte containing disparaging statements about her parenting |
| When | April 13-15, 2026 (divorce originally filed March 2025) |
| Where | Divorce proceedings in Florida (couple resided in Gainesville) |
| Who's affected | Ryan Lochte (12x Olympic medalist), Kayla Reid, and their 3 minor children (ages 2-6) |
| Key statute | Fla. Stat. § 61.13 — Florida's 20-factor best interests of the child analysis |
| Impact | Public disparagement between co-parents directly affects timesharing under Factor 3 of § 61.13(3) |
Why this matters legally
Florida courts treat interspousal disparagement as a significant timesharing factor, not a footnote. Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3)(a) requires judges to evaluate "the demonstrated capacity and disposition of each parent to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing parent-child relationship," and courts interpret disparaging communications as direct evidence of a parent's inability to foster that relationship.
The published emails are now admissible evidence. Under Florida Rule of Evidence 90.803, text messages and emails between parties qualify as admissions of a party-opponent. Once Reid's attorney introduces these communications in the pending Florida divorce case, Lochte cannot claim they were private or taken out of context — Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal confirmed in Boudreau v. Boudreau (2019) that electronic communications between spouses are routinely admitted to establish parental fitness.
This changes the trial posture significantly. Florida's 20-factor best interests analysis under Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3) explicitly includes Factor (m) — "evidence that any party has knowingly provided false information to the court regarding any prior or pending action" — and Factor (a), which examines each parent's capacity to encourage a healthy relationship with the other parent. Calling the mother of your children a "gold digger" in writing generally undermines both factors.
How Florida law handles this
Florida abolished the term "custody" in 2008 and replaced it with "timesharing" under Fla. Stat. § 61.046. Courts no longer award "primary" or "secondary" custody — instead, judges allocate parenting time and decision-making responsibility based on 20 statutory factors enumerated in Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3).
Florida presumes equal timesharing as of July 1, 2023. Governor Ron DeSantis signed HB 1301 into law on June 27, 2023, creating a rebuttable presumption that 50/50 timesharing serves the child's best interests. To overcome this presumption, a parent must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that equal timesharing would harm the child. Documented disparagement, hostile communications, and evidence of inability to co-parent can rebut the presumption under the revised Fla. Stat. § 61.13(2)(c).
Parental alienation evidence carries specific statutory weight. Florida courts applying Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3)(a) treat a parent's willingness to facilitate the child's relationship with the other parent as a critical factor. The Second District Court of Appeal held in Schumaker v. Schumaker, 931 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006), that evidence of one parent disparaging the other in the child's presence or in communications that could reach the child justifies modifying timesharing.
Alimony reform also applies here. Florida eliminated permanent alimony on July 1, 2023, under SB 1416, codified at Fla. Stat. § 61.08. For marriages of 7-20 years (the Lochte-Reid marriage lasted approximately 8 years from their 2018 wedding), durational alimony is now capped at 60% of the marriage length — meaning Reid could receive support for up to 4.8 years maximum, with amounts capped at 35% of the income difference.
Practical takeaways
-
Never put disparaging statements about your co-parent in writing. Every text, email, and social media post can be subpoenaed and admitted under Florida Rule of Evidence 90.803. Assume opposing counsel will read every message you send.
-
Preserve evidence properly under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.380. If you receive hostile communications, screenshot them with timestamps, back them up to cloud storage, and provide copies to your attorney. Do not delete messages — spoliation of evidence can result in sanctions.
-
Request a social media restriction order. Florida courts routinely issue mutual non-disparagement orders under Fla. Stat. § 61.13(2)(b)3, prohibiting both parents from posting negative content about each other publicly.
-
Document co-parenting communications through dedicated apps. Florida judges look favorably on parents who use OurFamilyWizard, TalkingParents, or AppClose — these platforms create an unalterable record that courts accept as evidence under Fla. Stat. § 90.902(11).
-
Request a Guardian ad Litem under Fla. Stat. § 61.403. When high-conflict communications reach the public record, appointing a GAL costs $2,000-$5,000 but provides an independent voice for the children's interests that judges weight heavily in contested timesharing cases.
-
Consider mediation before trial. Florida Statute § 44.102 requires most family law cases to attempt mediation before trial. Mediated agreements remove the risk that private communications become public court exhibits.
Frequently asked questions
Can my spouse's text messages be used against them in a Florida divorce?
Yes. Under Florida Rule of Evidence 90.803(18), text messages and emails between spouses qualify as admissions of a party-opponent and are routinely admitted as evidence. Florida courts have accepted electronic communications in divorce proceedings since the 2006 Brown v. Brown decision. Screenshots with timestamps satisfy authentication requirements under Fla. Stat. § 90.901.
Does calling your spouse names in emails affect Florida custody?
Yes. Florida's 20-factor best interests analysis under Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3)(a) evaluates each parent's capacity to encourage the other parent's relationship with the child. Disparaging communications directly undermine Factor 3 and can rebut the 2023 presumption of 50/50 timesharing. Florida's Second DCA confirmed this standard in Schumaker v. Schumaker (2006).
How long does a divorce take in Florida?
Florida requires a minimum 20-day waiting period after filing under Fla. Stat. § 61.19. Uncontested divorces typically finalize in 30-90 days. Contested cases involving children, high assets, or disputed timesharing average 12-18 months. The Lochte-Reid case entering its second year (filed March 2025) is typical for contested high-asset Florida divorces.
What is the 2023 Florida 50/50 timesharing presumption?
Florida HB 1301, effective July 1, 2023, created a rebuttable presumption under Fla. Stat. § 61.13(2)(c) that equal timesharing serves children's best interests. To overcome it, a parent must show by preponderance of evidence that 50/50 would harm the child — evidence of disparagement, substance abuse, or domestic violence can rebut the presumption.
Can I get alimony in Florida after a 7-year marriage?
Yes, but it's limited. Under Fla. Stat. § 61.08 (effective July 1, 2023), marriages of 7-20 years qualify for durational alimony capped at 60% of the marriage length. For an 8-year marriage, maximum duration is 4.8 years. Amounts are capped at 35% of the parties' income difference, calculated from net income.
Before you file
Florida divorce law changed dramatically in 2023 with the elimination of permanent alimony and adoption of the 50/50 timesharing presumption. If you're navigating a Florida divorce involving minor children, documented communications with your spouse, or significant assets, a Florida Bar-licensed family law attorney can walk you through how Fla. Stat. § 61.13 applies to your specific circumstances.
This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.