Mother Appeals Relocation Order Filed By Father

In the case of Mignott v. Mignott, the mother appealed a supplemental final judgment for the dissolution of marriage that incorporated and relied on an order granting a petition of the child’s father to relocate from Florida to Missouri. According to the appeals decision, the trial court failed to make the requisite statutory findings when granting the petition to relocate. The appeals court thus reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded the matter for further review.

Any parent who wishes to relocate more than 50 miles away from their current residence with a custody order in place must get the permission of the court to do so. In this article, the Tampa child custody attorneys at Faulkner Law Group, PLLC will discuss this relocation case and the statutory factors that determine whether or not a parent may relocate.

Background of the case 

The Mignotts were married in 2010. The marriage produced one child. In October 2016, the mother filed a petition for the dissolution of the marriage. Both parents initially shared parental responsibility for the child. However, the father gained primary custody of the child after the mother was arrested for aggravated assault in May 2017.

In September 2019, the father filed a petition to permit relocation with the minor child pursuant to section 61.13001, Florida Statutes. The mother objected to the relocation. The trial court granted the father’s petition to relocate stating that the father had tickets to leave for Missouri in the morning and the court didn’t want him to have a problem. The court made no other findings regarding the matter of relocation.

Analyzing the legal issues at play 

In the case of relocation, the court will grant a petition so long as it makes certain statutory findings supported by substantial competent evidence. The mother argued that the trial court failed to evaluate the statutory factors contained in section 61.13001(7), Florida Statutes. The appeals court agreed with the mother. The court never decided the matter on the relevant statutory factors.

Ultimately, the trial court’s job is to determine whether or not the relocation is in the best interests of the child. The appellate court’s job is to determine whether or not the trial court abused its discretion when granting or denying the motion. In this case, the trial court never reviewed the statutory factors related to the case. Since a review of the statutory factors never occurred the appeals court found that the trial court abused its discretion in an effort to allow the father to make his flight. Ultimately, the appellate court reversed the ruling and remanded the matter to be decided again by another judge.

Talk to a Tampa, FL Family Law Attorney Today 

Faulkner Law Group, PLLC represents the interests of Tampa residents who are attempting to relocate with a custody order in place. Call our Tampa family law attorneys today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

law.justia.com/cases/florida/third-district-court-of-appeal/2021/3d20-1225.html