New York Family Law Blog
When it comes to whether a parent will be permitted to relocate with a child, the court will make a determination as to to whether it is in the best interests of the child. While the case can become more complicated where a parent is incarcerated and grandparents oppose relocation, the inquiry is the same: What is the in best interests of the child.
Background Facts
Celinda JJ. v. Adrian JJ. 2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 5900 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2021) involves a mother and father with four children. The father was convicted of rape against the mother and another female, resulting in a 15-year prison sentence. Seeking permission to relocate to South Carolina, the mother initiated legal proceedings. In a separate case, the paternal grandmother’s request for custody and visitation was denied, granting the mother sole legal and primary physical custody. A hearing was set to consider the relocation petition.
The mother, a licensed practical nurse, testified about her living situation in Broome County, where she worked overtime to cover expenses. Following the father’s conviction, she received limited support from the paternal grandparents but relied on increased assistance from her maternal grandparents, who lived in South Carolina. She expressed a desire to move closer to them, citing their offer of housing and free childcare. With these supports, she anticipated spending more time with her children and pursuing a registered nursing degree. The maternal grandparents planned to accommodate the family during the relocation, with eventual plans to purchase a home in South Carolina due to its lower cost of living.
During the children’s summer break, the older ones stayed with the maternal grandparents in South Carolina. The court noted the minimal impact on the father’s relationship with the children due to his incarceration and limited contact post-conviction. Concerning the paternal grandparents and half-siblings in New York, the mother planned to maintain contact and coordinate visitation.
After reviewing the evidence and applicable factors, the court concluded that relocating to South Carolina was in the children’s best interests, citing the potential economic and emotional benefits. The father’s limited communication with the children and lack of testimony further supported the decision. The father appealed the Family Court decision.
Issue
Whether the mother’s relocation to South Carolina with the children would be in the best interests of the children and if it justified modifying the existing custody order.
Holding
The appellate court affirmed the Family Court’s decision to grant the mother’s request to relocate with the children to South Carolina.
Rationale
The appellate division’s rationale was grounded in the consideration of various factors regarding the proposed relocation of the mother and the children to South Carolina. They weighed the mother’s reasons for the move, the quality of relationships between the children and both parents, the potential impact on future contact with the noncustodial father, and the economic and emotional benefits of the move. Additionally, they evaluated the feasibility of maintaining the relationship between the children and the noncustodial parent through suitable parenting time arrangements.
The court took into account the mother’s testimony regarding her current living situation, employment, and the support she received from both sets of grandparents. They recognized her primary motivation for the relocation as being closer to the maternal grandparents, who offered housing and childcare assistance. The court also considered the potential economic benefits for the mother and children, including her ability to pursue higher education and save money due to lower living costs in South Carolina.
Furthermore, the court assessed the minimal impact of the relocation on the father’s relationship with the children, given his extended incarceration and limited contact following his conviction. They noted Family Court’s previous determination that visitation with the paternal grandmother was not in the children’s best interests. Similarly, they acknowledged the mother’s plan to coordinate visitation between the children and their half-siblings in New York.
Based on their review of the evidence and consideration of relevant factors, the appellate division concluded that allowing the mother and children to relocate to South Carolina would serve the children’s best interests. Consequently, they affirmed the Family Court’s decision without costs.
Conclusion
The appellate court upheld the Family Court’s decision, finding that the proposed relocation to South Carolina was in the best interests of the children. The court’s decision was based on a thorough consideration of the evidence and applicable legal factors, and it was supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record.