On April 23, 2001, the Supreme Court of New Jersey decided Baures v. Lewis, 167 N.J. 91 (2001). For more than 16 years, Baures guided post-divorce interstate relocation of children in a manner that generally favored the primary-custodial parent who sought relocation. On Aug. 8, 2017, the Supreme Court decided Bisbing v. Bisbing, __ N.J. __ (2017), which reversed Baures and set the new standard for interstate relocation disputes—a “best interests” analysis. Bisbing is a landmark decision thatserves as a departure from Baures.
In its 2001 decision, the Baures court recognized that courts had “struggled to accommodate the interests of parents and children in a removal situation ….” Baures, 167 N.J. at 91. Although Baures set forth a framework to resolve parents’ relocation disputes, the above quote also fittingly describes the intervening period between Baures and Bisbing. That is, while Baures provided a cogent framework to guide relocation disputes, the framework did not adequately accommodate the interests of children and both parents in a removal situation. Bisbing, however, accommodates the interests of children and both parents by placing the parents on equal footing. To that end, the court departed from Baures and held that all relocation disputes—regardless of custodial arrangement—must be determined under the “best interests” factors set forth in N.J.S.A. 9:2–4(c). Thus, following Bisbing, a primary custodial parent who seeks post-divorce relocation to another state must establish the “good cause” required by N.J.S.A. 9:2-2 through the best interests factors set forth in N.J.S.A. 9:2–4(c).
