California Move-Away Custody Law: What Parents Need to Know About Relocation

When one parent wishes to move so far away from the other that normal visitation cannot take place, the automatic question becomes: “Can they do that?!” Unfortunately for the non-custodial parent and fortunately for the custodial parent, the answer is “yes” most of the time. A case called Marriage of Burgess made it easier for the custodial parent to relocate the children out of their former area of residence.

Family Code Section 7501 states that the custodial parent holds a presumptive right to change the children’s residence, as long as it does not prejudice the children’s rights or welfare. Interestingly, the Burgess court held that the parent seeking the move away does not need to prove the move is necessary or meet any other burden to move away, but only that it falls within the parameters of Family Code Section 7501.

In Burgess, both parties lived in Tehachapi. The wife petitioned the court to relocate the children to Lancaster, which was 40 miles away. The wife had sole physical custody of the children, and the Husband had liberal visitation. The wife testified that the move would give her a better position at work and provide the children with a better opportunity for education and medical care. The husband testified that he would be unable to maintain his visitation schedule.

The court held that permitting the children to move to Lancaster was in the children’s best interest and that the parent seeking to relocate the children bears no burden of establishing that the move is necessary. The Burgess court even went on to say, “We discern no statutory basis, however, for imposing a specific additional burden of persuasion on either parent to justify a choice of residence as a condition of custody.”

How the Burgess Case Changed California Custody Law

The Marriage of Burgess decision shifted California family law by creating a presumption in favor of the custodial parent’s right to relocate. Instead of requiring proof that a move was necessary, courts focused only on whether the move prejudiced the child’s welfare. This meant the non-custodial parent often faced a significant hurdle in contesting relocation.

However, as relocation disputes became more complex and frequent, California courts refined the approach to better balance the rights of both parents and the child.

The Evolution of Move-Away Case Law

The LaMusga Factors (2004)

In In re Marriage of LaMusga, the California Supreme Court emphasized that relocation cases cannot be resolved solely by presumptions. Judges must carefully weigh the best interests of the child, considering:

• The child’s need for stability and continuity.
• The impact of the move on the child’s relationship with the non-custodial parent.
• The motives of the parent seeking relocation.
• The quality of educational and health opportunities at the new location.
• The feasibility of maintaining ongoing contact with both parents.

This decision restored greater judicial discretion, ensuring that a move away cannot proceed if it would undermine a child’s welfare.

Brown & Yana (2006)

In Brown & Yana, the court clarified that not every request for relocation requires a full evidentiary hearing. If the opposing parent cannot show that the move would be detrimental to the child, a detailed trial may not be necessary. This case highlighted the importance of presenting strong evidence when challenging relocation.

International Relocation – Marriage of Condon (1998)

The case of Marriage of Condon dealt with a mother’s request to relocate internationally with her children. The court allowed the move but imposed conditions, including requiring the mother to post a bond to ensure compliance with the custody orders. This case illustrates how courts may permit international relocations, but with safeguards to protect the non-custodial parent’s rights.

Key Family Code Provisions

California statutes also shape relocation disputes:

• Family Code §7501 – grants custodial parents the presumptive right to change residence, provided it does not harm the child’s welfare.
• Family Code §3020 – establishes California’s policy favoring frequent and continuing contact with both parents.
• Family Code §3087 – allows modification of custody orders when necessary to serve the child’s best interests.

Together, these provisions guide judges in balancing the custodial parent’s freedom of movement with the child’s need for stability and ongoing contact with their parents.

Joint Custody and Relocation

When parents share joint physical custody, the outcome is very different. In such situations, there is no presumption in favor of relocation. Instead, courts treat the relocation request as a modification of custody. Judges apply the “best interest of the child” test under Family Code §3011, which may involve awarding primary custody to the parent who remains if relocation would disrupt the child’s stability.

For parents in joint custody arrangements, the stakes are often higher, as a relocation request can trigger a reevaluation of the entire custody order.

In-State, Out-of-State, and International Moves

Relocation cases vary significantly depending on distance:

• In-State Moves – Courts are more likely to allow shorter relocations, especially if visitation schedules can be adjusted without serious harm to the parent-child relationship.
• Out-of-State Moves – Judges examine how a long-distance move will affect visitation, continuity of schooling, and the child’s access to both parents.
• International Relocation – Courts proceed cautiously, balancing opportunities abroad with the difficulty of maintaining frequent contact. Conditions such as financial bonds or sharing travel expenses are sometimes imposed.

Temporary vs. Permanent Relocations

Not all relocations are permanent. Some custodial parents request temporary moves for employment, military deployment, or education. Courts evaluate these differently, often allowing temporary relocation if it serves the family’s needs while protecting the child’s ongoing relationship with both parents.

What Happens if a Parent Moves Without Permission?

If a custodial parent relocates a child without court approval, the consequences can be severe. Judges may:

• Order the parent to return the child immediately.
• Modify custody in favor of the non-relocating parent.
• Impose contempt of court sanctions.

Unauthorized relocations can undermine the relocating parent’s credibility in future custody disputes and jeopardize their custodial rights.

The Legal Process in a Move-Away Case

Relocation cases follow a structured process in California family courts:

1. Filing a Motion or Request to Relocate – The custodial parent petitions the court, explaining the reasons for the relocation and proposing adjustments to visitation.
2. Response by the Other Parent – The non-custodial parent can oppose the request, often filing for a custody modification.
3. Mediation – California requires custody mediation before hearings. Parents attempt to negotiate parenting plans.
4. Court Hearing – If no agreement is reached, a judge reviews evidence, testimony, and the child’s best interests.
5. Final Order – The judge grants or denies relocation, sometimes restructuring custody and visitation.

The Child’s Perspective

As children grow older, California courts increasingly consider their preferences. Judges may conduct private interviews with children or rely on recommendations from custody evaluators. While a child’s wishes are not determinative, they carry weight, particularly for teenagers who may resist relocation.

FAQs About California Move-Away Cases

Can I prevent my ex from taking our child away?

Yes. You must show that the relocation would be detrimental to your child’s welfare or significantly impair your relationship. Strong evidence is key.

Does my ex need my permission to move with our child?

If the move disrupts your visitation rights, you will need to obtain court approval. A custodial parent cannot simply relocate a child without notice.

What if we share joint custody?

Relocation in joint custody situations requires court review and is treated as a modification of custody, with no presumption favoring either parent.

Can a parent move internationally with a child?

Yes, but international relocations are subject to stricter scrutiny. Courts may require safeguards to ensure compliance with custody orders.

What happens if a parent relocates without court approval?

They risk losing custody, being found in contempt of court, and facing orders to return the child.

How much does it cost to fight a move-away case?

Costs vary depending on attorney fees, custody evaluations, and whether a full evidentiary hearing is required. Early legal advice is recommended.

Get Legal Help With Relocation Disputes

Move-away custody disputes are among the most challenging issues in California family law. They involve balancing the custodial parent’s freedom, the non-custodial parent’s rights, and above all, the child’s best interests.

At Reape Rickett, our attorneys have extensive experience representing both custodial and non-custodial parents in relocation disputes, from in-state moves to international custody battles. We understand the complexities of California law, the evidence courts require, and the strategies that can protect your parental rights.

If you are facing a potential relocation or seeking to prevent one, our team is ready to provide trusted legal guidance.

Contact Reape Rickett today to schedule a confidential consultation and ensure your child’s best interests remain protected.