Possibly correct but poorly reasoned custody and relocation decision from the Court of Appeals

The January 24, 2018 Court of Appeals opinion in Burgess v. Arnold is possibly correct but, in at least three important particulars, poorly reasoned. Burgess stems from Mother’s appeal of a family court order that gave the parties joint custody with her having primary custody over all issue except education. That order required that she relinquish custody to Father if she moved to Florida, where her husband lives. Father cross-appealed the provision of the order that provided the custodial arrangement would resume if she moved back to South Carolina after moving to Florida. The Court of Appeals opinion rules in Mother’s favor. It grants her sole custody and authorizes her to relocate with the child to Florida. Based on the fact pattern described–Father appears very manipulative and controlling and the child appears more closely bonded to Mother–this was possibly the correct result. However the Court of Appeals’ reasoning to reach this decision was…

Read more detail on Recent Family Law posts –

This entry was posted in Family Law and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply