TN Mom Not Allowed to Relocate to KY for New Job
Tennessee law case summary on parent relocation from the Court of Appeals.
In re Adelyn B. – Tennessee parent relocation denied
The parents in this Tennessee parental relocation case were never married, but were the parents of one daughter. At the time of the girl’s birth in 2007, they lived in Camden, Tennessee. In 2008, they entered into an agreed parenting plan which was signed by a juvenile court judge in 2008. The mother was named the primary residential parent with 235 days of parenting time, with the remaining 130 days allocated to the father.
In 2009, the father went to court for an emergency modification. He alleged that the mother was not complying with the plan and was using illegal drugs. After a hearing, the court adopted a schedule where the parents alternated weeks.
In 2012, the mother went to court asking for a modification on the grounds of material change of circumstances. She asked for permission to move to Nashville, where she believed she would be able to obtain better employment. The father, however, argued that the mother had absolutely no family support in the Nashville area, and that this move would not be in the child’s best interest. The mother eventually abandoned these plans to relocate. However, in 2013, she again filed a motion to modify the parenting schedule, this time because she planned to move to Louisville, Kentucky. She had already secured a job in the Louisville area, and her mother and stepfather resided there.
A trial was held, and the trial court first determined that the parents had been spending substantially equal amounts of time with the child. The evidence also showed that if she moved to Louisville, the current parenting plan would not work.
After hearing all of the evidence and talking to the daughter, the trial court made its ruling. It held that it was not in the best interests of the child to move, since the mother had not established a stable residence or employment in Louisville. Dissatisfied, the mother appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The appeals court first noted that it reviews the case de novo, but with a presumption that the trial court’s findings are correct. In a case such as this, where the parents have been spending equal time with the child, the standard is whether the move is in the child’s best interests. The appeals court noted that in this case, many of the factors didn’t weigh in favor of either party. However, it carefully examined the evidence and concluded that none of the evidence preponderated against the lower court’s findings.
The appeals court agreed with the lower court that continuity in the child’s life was one of the most important factors in this case. It noted that the lower court had found that life with the father was slightly more stable than with the mother. He had more stable employment and earned between $45,000 and $60,000 per year. Even though the mother believed that she would earn greater income once she got her Kentucky cosmetology license, the court called this a circumstance that “may exist in the distant, uncertain future.”
After carefully considering all of the evidence, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s findings. It remanded the case to Benton County for further proceedings.
No. W2013-02374-COA-R3-JV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 24, 2014).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Tennessee Parent Relocation Statute Law | Modifying the Parenting Plan
