Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Child Custody
Once a party in Florida child custody case presents his or her case that relocation is in the best interest of a child, the burden of proof then shifts to the other party to establish that relocation is not in the child’s best interest. This was an issue in the case Gevaert v. Teh, 3D24-2280 (Fla. 3d DCA September 17, 2025).
The mother filed a petition to relocate with the parties’ child from Miami to California, and the trial court denied her petition. She appealed, arguing the court did not properly consider the testimony of her expert witness. The appellate court disagreed, holding “[T]his argument suffers from tunnel vision. Indeed, the expert witness’ testimony focused solely on what schools are best for the child. Whereas the trial court was required to consider a wider range of factors— those set forth in section 61.13001(7), Florida Statutes. See § 61.13001(7)(a)-(k), Fla. Stat. And it did. In reaching its conclusion, the trial court scrutinized the evidence presented by both parties and performed a detailed analysis of the factors in 61.13001(7), Florida Statutes. Ultimately, it found Teh met his burden and the proposed relocation was not in the best interest of the child. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying relocation.”
Schedule your meeting with a Miami family law attorney to determine the next best steps in your case.