Baxendale v. Raich

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that regardless of whether the order was reviewed as on a petition to modify or a petition to prevent relocation, the result would be the same “because when a relocation is made in good faith, … both analyses ultimately turn on the ‘best interests of the child’”
• when there is “no showing what the anticipated evidence would have been,” an argument for admission of evidence is precluded on appeal
• trial court is required to consider the factors listed in the relocation statutes when determining custody pursuant to a relocation
• party who advised trial court that special findings were unnecessary was estopped from arguing on appeal that trial court erred in not entering findings
• child’s school performance, proximity to his family members who provided temporary care, and established athletic and extra-curricular activities all supported trial court’s decision to change custody to allow child to remain in Indiana with father when mother relocated to Minnesota
• “Obviously, we can speculate that the court’s in camera interview also affected the court’s conclusion as to the child’s wishes. But there is nothing in the record that gives us any basis to conclude that this factor was significant in the trial court’s ruling.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).