The 180-Mile Move: Defective Relocation Notice, Best Interests, and Support
Since their 2021 divorce, Andre and Beth have shared 50/50 parenting time of two children, ages 7 and 11, under a plan entered by the circuit court that granted the divorce. Beth now wants to move 180 miles away for a job paying $14,000 more. The plan requires 60 days' written notice by certified mail. Beth sent a text message 21 days before the start of the school year and filed a motion to modify parenting time, requesting permission to relocate and an immediate temporary move so the older child can start at the new school. Andre objects. He earns $52,000; Beth earns $61,000. Neither pays support now because time is equal. Andre's attorney learns that Beth's new partner has a 2019 misdemeanor conviction and that Beth has not yet found housing in the new district.
1. How should Andre respond procedurally to the notice defect and the request for an immediate temporary move?
Read the worked answer
File a written objection and a response before the hearing date, and ask for a continuance if discovery is incomplete. The 21-day text does not satisfy the plan's 60-day certified-mail requirement. That defect usually does not destroy the court's power to decide the motion, but it is strong evidence of bad faith or failure to prioritize the children's stability, and it supports denying any temporary move.
Oppose the request for an immediate move. Temporary relocation before an evidentiary hearing is extraordinary; it is not an emergency merely because a school year is starting. Request that the children remain in their current schools and that Beth's parenting time continue until the court hears evidence. If the court is inclined to allow a temporary move, ask for a specific schedule, a deadline for Beth to secure housing, and an order requiring her to provide the address and school records.
Use discovery: requests for the new lease or proof of housing, the job offer and start date, school enrollment documents, and the partner's criminal record. Ask for a guardian ad litem or child interview if the forum permits it. Preserve the text message and the plan's notice provision; both go into the best-interests analysis.
2. Who bears the burden on relocation, and how should the court weigh the new job, the school transition, and the partner's conviction?
Read the worked answer
Many states place the burden on the parent seeking to relocate to show a good-faith reason and that the move serves the children's best interests; others apply a presumption favoring the existing arrangement or the involved parent. Confirm the local rule before the hearing, because the burden often decides the case.
A $14,000 raise is a legitimate, good-faith economic reason, but it is not self-proving. Compare it with the increased travel and housing costs and the loss of the father's midweek time. The 180-mile distance makes 50/50 time impractical and will convert the arrangement into a long-distance schedule, which is a substantial change for both children.
The 11-year-old's mid-year school transition cuts both ways: continuity favors Andre, but a child who has already enrolled may face disruption if the move is denied. The 7-year-old's stability and the siblings' placement together should be addressed. The partner's 2019 misdemeanor is not automatically disqualifying; its relevance depends on the offense, whether the children will be in his care, and whether any safety conditions exist. Object to it as character evidence unless it bears on the children's welfare. The absence of housing in the new district undercuts Beth's claim that the move is concrete and child-focused.
3. What are the support and jurisdictional consequences if the move is allowed?
Read the worked answer
Equal parenting time is the premise of the current zero-support order. If the move reduces Andre's overnights below the threshold in the guidelines, the change is likely substantial enough to modify support, even though both parents' incomes are stable. Run the guideline calculation with the proposed long-distance schedule, and ask that travel costs be allocated under the forum's rule, which may treat them as a shared expense, a deviation factor, or a credit to the traveling parent.
Do not assume the raise alone justifies modification. A $14,000 difference may be absorbed by the guideline formula and the existing income disparity; the argument is strongest when tied to the changed overnights and travel burden. Request income documentation for the new job, including the start date and any bonus.
The UCCJEA does not lose jurisdiction merely because a parent moves. The circuit court that entered the divorce remains the home state with continuing exclusive jurisdiction, and the children have not resided elsewhere for the required period. If Beth moves, Andre may need to register the order in the new state only to enforce it. Include a provision requiring notice of any future address change and a defined holiday and summer schedule.