Retamozzo v. Moyer
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
“When reviewing a custodial parent’s request to relocate, the court’s primary focus must be on the best interests of the child” (Matter of Giraldo v Gomez, 49 AD3d 645, 645 [2008]; see Matter of Tropea v Tropea, 87 NY2d 727, 739 [1996]; Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167 [1982]; Matter of Hamed v Hamed, 88 AD3d 791, 791 [2011]; Matter of Said v Said, 61 AD3d 879, 881 [2009]). “Relocation may be allowed if the custodial parent demonstrates, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed move is in the child’s best interests” (Matter of Steadman v Roumer, 81 AD3d 653, 654 [2011]).…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Eschbach v. EschbachNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- MATTER OF TROPEA v. TropeaNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- Bliss v. AchNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Said v. SaidAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Giraldo v. GomezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Hirtz v. HirtzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Davis v. OgdenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Piccinini v. PiccininiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Matter of Lopez v. ChasquettiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Ortiz v. OrtizAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.