Jeffrey R. Arnott v. Paula a/k/a Polly A. Arnott

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the relocation of a primary custodian to another state may constitute a material change in circumstances that warrants modification of child custody
• acknowledging that the custodial parent’s right to travel is not the only interest to be protected in relocation cases because the child and other parent have “an equally important fundamental right of familial association”
• noting “the cardinal rule that when the rights of a parent and the rights of a child collide, it is the rights of the parent which must yield”
• “[T]he best interests of the children are of overriding importance, and [] they take precedence over the fundamental rights of parents . . . .”
• “[P]resumptions in favor of one parent or 5 another are detrimental to the interests of all parties in cases involving modification of child custody based on relocation of a custodial parent.”
• “We note that the district court was able to consider a great deal of evidence bearing on the best interests of the children in addressing the issue of whether there had been a material change in circumstances.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).