Tennessee Mom Can Move to Alabama After Her New Husband is Stationed There
Tennessee law case summary on parent relocation in divorce and family law from the Court of Appeals.
Randy Scott Lower v. Melanie Ewing Lower – Tennessee parent relocation granted
The child in this Tennessee parental relocation case was born in 2007, and the parents were divorced in 2009. The mother was named the primary residential parent, but both parents had equal visitation of 182.5 days.
After the divorce, both parents remarried. The wife’s new husband, who was in the Army, requested a position in Alabama that would allow him to avoid future deployments. This request was granted, and the mother prepared to relocate, and gave the father notice of her intent. The father then made a motion to modify the parenting plan, and asked to be named the primary residential parent.
A hearing was held. The mother testified that her husband was now stationed in Alabama as a flight instructor. The child was five, and was about to start school. She testified that the child was able to adjust well to new surroundings and to the stepfather’s other three children. The father also testified as to his relationship, and there had been a generally amicable relationship between the parents since the divorce. After hearing, the trial court granted the mother’s request to relocate. The court noted that the father had not exercised substantially equal time with the child. It also found that the relocation was reasonable, would not harm the child, and was not vindictive. Dissatisfied with this ruling, the father appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The appeal hinged on the Tennessee parental relocation statute. Under that statute, the test is different depending on whether the parents have been spending equal time with the child. Therefore, the first determination is whether that is the case.
The father argued that any differences in the amount of time spent with the child were due to the fact that he was also in the Army, and the fact that he was engaged in this admirable profession should not be held against him. The court agreed, but also noted that the statute focused on the actual amount of time spent with the child, and not the reasons. And since the mother had spent more time with the child, the court was required to focus on that portion of the statute.
In cases where there is not substantially equal time, there are only three tests. The move must have a reasonable purpose, there is no threat of harm to the child, and the motive must not be vindictive. The appeals court also noted that the party opposing relocation bears the burden of proof.
The appeals court carefully examined the record and concluded that the evidence had supported the lower court’s findings with respect to these factors. For that reason, it affirmed, and allowed the relocation.
No. M2013-02593-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 8, 2014).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Tennessee Parent Relocation Statute Law | Modifying the Parenting Plan.
