Relocation Cases
June 3rd, 2008Here is an interesting post about relocation cases in the state of Nevada. The author is a college professor in Nevada who blogs about his divorce experience. He describes the relocation statute and how, in his opinion, it is usually applied in a way that allows the custodial parent to move the child away from the non-custodial parent.
The Nevada statute gives very specific guidance to the court making such a decision but some of the factors seem rather weak to me. For example, the statute lists factors the court should consider in making its decision, including “whether housing and environmental living conditions will be improved,” and “whether the custodial parent’s employment and income will improve.”
The Texas Family Code has a statute that requires that all orders naming the parties as joint managing conservators (typically, divorce and paternity cases) to give the exclusive right to establish residence to one parent (this is generally what determines which parent is “primary”). That statute further requires that the order state whether the residency is restricted to a specific geographical area (and if so what area) or that there is no geographical restriction. The vast majority of Texas cases include a geographical restriction. A typical example would be a restriction to Harris County, Texas and the contiguous (surrounding) counties.
Unlike Nevada, the Texas Family Code does not provide any specific guidance as to how the courts are to determine relocation cases. So when a custodial parent with a residency restriction wants to move that parent would file a petition to modify, essentially asking the court to remove the restriction. Ultimately, the standard applied by the court in deciding the case would be whether the move was in the child’s best interest.
Although a lot of factors would be considered, in most cases the biggest factor is how involved the non-custodial parent was in the child’s life. If that parent was very involved with child, the custodial parent probably would have a difficult case to win. If the non-custodial parent was uninvolved, the custodial parent would have a much stronger case.
June 3rd, 2008 at 9:21 am
Thanks for the link, Scott. Technically the Nevada statute is silent on the factors. The factors are derived from case law.
Interestingly, I was a resident of Texas for 5 years before moving to Nevada. In hindsight, it would have been much better divorcing in Texas.
June 3rd, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Steve, thanks for the clarification.
July 2nd, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Hi, a question that I am going thru now, I have custody of my 2 year, my ex does have alot of time with her, but I need to move a little over 100 miles away to get a better job. My divorce states that as long as I stay within 100 miles that I can move wherever, now the move I want to make is 125 miles away, does that make a difference since it is such a small number of miles over the allowable limit? Can my ex keep me from moving, can he go to the court and get custody of my child because of a move to another city? Typically how long of a fight can I expect were it to go to that point. Thanks for your help. James
July 2nd, 2008 at 1:41 pm
James, I usually try to avoid giving the standard response of, “you need to talk to a lawyer” about the specifics of your situation and the language of your order. In your case though I think it is good advice. The specific language of the court order is crucial in evaluating your situation and no attorney could really help you without first doing that.
July 19th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Hello I m running into this issue with my ex in collin county, we have gone to court spet and in march and are now scheduled to go again in aug due to her asking to lift the current restrictions she has to live in collin county etc,,, she wants to lift the restrictin and move to CA,,,,she laims for work yet I know it is not, she works from home and we work for the same company… how do i put an end to going to court every 4 mnths, its getting old… and hurting the kids,,,
July 29th, 2008 at 10:06 am
My sister’s divorce decree states that if her ex misses two periods of visitation in any calendar year, that the geographic restriction “is lifted” in that exact language. Since this special provision is unique, we feel that a motion to modify was not necessary for her to request permission to leave the state after he did miss (he also admitted to missing more than two visitations during the motion to modify trial). Is she wrong to assume that this special provision allows for automatic permission once the admission was made that he missed? She is very afraid to leave the state and be pulled back because “is lifted” does not actually mean “is lifted.” Help! Thanks.
July 29th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Danielle, this is another one of those situations where your sister needs a good family law attorney to review her Decree and get detailed information so she can get some good advice. Geographical restrictions are tricky and an area where the law keeps evolving, so she really needs someone good to properly advise her.