A finding that a removal is against the child’s best interests must rest on more than a determination that removal will in some way change the visitation arrangements or change the child’s relationship with the noncustodial parent. The court must make a finding that removal will significantly harm or impede the child’s relationship with the noncustodial parent and that this harm will work to the child’s detriment.
Move out of state should be decided under new law.
Removal statute is directed to determine whether physical placement should be transferred – not whether custodial parent has right to move.
Trial court properly applied §767.325 where mother brought removal action and father countered with motion to change placement. Once father filed a motion to modify placement based on circumstances other than the move, the court can consider all relevant circumstances, including but limited to the move in deciding whether to modify placement.
The removal statute does not apply in paternity actions. (Not Published; Cannot Be Cited.)
150 miles is measured by “ordinary routes of travel,” not “as the crow flies.” (Not Published; Cannot Be Cited.)
Circuit court had no authority to prospectively order that Wife not move beyond forty-five miles from the marital home. By its enactment of Wis. Stat. § 767.481, the legislature has made a judgment that moves of less than 150 miles are not subject to the best interests of the children standard.
Trial court properly ordered mother to return to Wisconsin after she moved to area and school district other than the one she had designated in her petition for removal.
While father’s intent to move to Washington was not unreasonable as it would allow him to pursue his best career options in the navy, the removal of the children from Wisconsin to Washington was unreasonable and not in their best interests.