Moms allowed to relocate to Germany with children

Tennessee child custody case summary on relocation in divorce and family law.

Mom allowed to relocate with kids to Germany.

James Henry Whitaker, II, v. Viktoria Moor

The parents in this Lincoln County, Tennessee, case were divorced in 2018, and the mother was named the primary residential parent of the two minor children. The father was allowed 144 days of parenting time per year. The father returned to court to request more parenting time. However, while the case was pending the mother announced her intention to move with her children to Germany to be closer to family. The father was against this move.

The court heard testimony regarding various parenting disputes. The children were dual-citizens and spoke German at home. The mother testified she was willing to allow the father to call her weekly and bring the children to America during school breaks. The trial court found that although the mother tried to coparent with the father, he made it very difficult. It also ordered at least four phone calls per week. It also ordered at least four phone calls per week.

The father appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals, which first pointed out that the lower court’s factual findings had a presumption of correctness.

The lower court had found that the mother had a stronger relationship with the children, and that the father exhibited a bias toward the mother. The court also found that mother’s family would help with parenting and that the children could adapt to a new school in Germany. The appeals court acknowledged that it would have been better if the mother’s family had testified, but they held that the testimony of the wife was sufficient to support the lower court’s conclusions. The trial court was best placed to decide this issue, as there was conflicting testimony about the children’s ability. However, the father also claimed that the lower court misapplied certain statutory factors when making the relocation decision. But on review, the appeals court held that the lower court had acted properly.

Both parties asked for attorney’s fees on appeal, but both requests were denied.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision.