Bates v. Tesar
Jun 06, 2002OUTCOME: Court affirmed denial of relocation.
From LexisOne.com: "On review, the appellate court ruled that the trial court erred in applying the statutory presumption that joint managing conservatorship was in the best interest of the children an ... d erred in requiring the mother to rebut this presumption. The father, as the moving party, was required to prove a change in circumstances. The trial court found that as a result of the mother's move to a location within the state, but over 300 miles away, the children were subjected to: the strain of relocation; frequent air travel (generally unaccompanied by an adult); loss of social and recreational opportunities of the children with the father; loss of additional parenting times between the children and the father; and the disruption of the children's routine at the their schools and with their friends. The appellate court ruled that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that there had been a material and substantial change in circumstances since the date of the divorce, and that retention of the sole managing conservatorship would have been detrimental to the children. The domicile restriction did not violate the mother's right to travel, nor did it violate due process."
