Michelle Andrade v. Christano Andrade

Syllabus

The plaintiff, Michelle Andrade, appealed from two Family Court orders—the first denying her motion to relocate with the parties' minor child, and the second granting the motion of the defendant, Christano Andrade, to modify child support. On appeal, the plaintiff argued that the trial justice erred in denying her motion to relocate by \overlooking and/or misconceiving evidence.\ The plaintiff also argued that the trial justice erred in failing to consider the relevant factors under G.L. 1956 § 15-5-16.2(a) and by failing to make the findings required by §§ 15-5-16.2(a), 15 5 16.2(c)(2), 15-5-16.2.4, and 15-5-16.7. The Supreme Court held that the trial justice did not err in denying the plaintiff's motion to relocate with the parties' minor child. The Supreme Court concluded that the trial justice properly considered and weighed the relevant factors in denying the plaintiff's motion to relocate. The Supreme Court also held that the trial justice did not overlook or misconceive material evidence in denying the plaintiff's motion to relocate. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the order denying the motion to relocate. The Supreme Court further held that the trial justice erred by failing to consider the circumstances, or any change thereof, concerning the minor child's needs or the defendant's ability to pay child support, as was necessary when considering a motion to modify child support. Accordingly, the Supreme Court vacated the order granting the defendant's motion to modify child support.