How to Succeed in a Relocation Case

What the Courts Say

It can be a difficult task to persuade a court that it should permit the relocation of a child. Some of the problems custodial parents can encounter in this regard are illustrated by a recent case in which permission to move was denied. In In The Matter of Verhulst v. Putnam (Suffolk County Family Court, Referee Heather James, Aug. 3, 2009), a mother sought to relocate to northern Massachusetts with the parties' son, purportedly because she wanted to reside closer to her parents and was having difficultly finding suitable employment on Long Island. The court, however, ruled against relocation and ordered the mother to remain on Long Island because it became clear during the trial that she primarily wanted to distance herself and the parties' son from the father, to make it difficult for him to have contact with their child. Further, the mother failed to establish why she needed to move and why it was in the best interests of her child to relocate. Notably, although she alleged that she had lost her job on Long Island, she failed to provide any documentary proof verifying why her employment was terminated, and also neglected to provide the court with proof demonstrating her attempts to seek commensurate employment in the Long Island area. In addition, she failed to provide the court with a detailed parenting time schedule that would provide the father with a suitable amount of parenting time. The court, in denying the mother's petition, wrote: “Unfortunately, the mother's anger at the father's refusal to have a continued relationship with her has caused the mother to make every effort to minimize the father's role in [the child's] life. To allow the mother to relocate [the child's] residence to Massachusetts would undermine the father's relationship with [him] in a way for which there is no appropriate means to ensure future contact with the non-custodial parent.”