The Tennessee Supreme Court recently issued a ruling that effects whether or not the Primary Residential Parent is allowed to move with the child.
The current Parental Relocation Statute (T.C.A. section 36-6-108) states as follows:
(a) After custody or co-parenting has been established by the entry of a permanent parenting plan or final order, if a parent who is spending intervals of time with a child desires to relocate outside the state or more than fifty (50) miles from the other parent within the state, the relocating parent shall send a notice to the other parent at the other parent‘s last known address by registered or certified mail. Unless excused by the court for exigent circumstances, the notice shall be mailed not later than sixty (60) days prior to the move. The notice shall contain the following:
(1) Statement of intent to move;
(2) Location of proposed new residence;
(3) Reasons for proposed relocation; and
(4) Statement that the other parent may file a petition in opposition to the move within thirty (30) days of receipt of the notice.
On March 16, 2017, Aragon v. Aragon clarified the Parental Relocation Statute and specifically addressed the “reasonable purpose” of a proposed relocation. Overruling a previous case (Webster v. Webster) the Court held, “Under the natural and ordinary meaning of the term reasonable purpose, we hold that the father stated a reasonable purpose for relocating to Arizona with the parties child and that the mother did not carry her burden of establishing a ground for denying the father permission to relocate with the child.”
The Court also emphasized, “Under section 36-6-108(d)(1), [t]he parent spending the greater amount of time with the child shall be permitted to relocate with the child unless the court finds that the parent opposing the relocation has proven one of the enumerated grounds.”
Want to read the entire opinion – or print it for your court date? Click here for Aragon v. Aragon