The moving party mother brought a motion for an interim order permitting her to relocate with the parties' six-year-old child to another city for employment reasons.
The responding party father opposed the move and sought a shared parenting arrangement.
The court found that it was premature to permit relocation on an interim basis given the conflicting evidence and the significant disruption it would cause to the child's status quo and the father's parenting time.
The court dismissed the relocation motion, adjourning the issue to trial, and ordered a shared-care parenting schedule on a four-day rotation.
