On Aug. 8, 2017, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously held, in an opinion written by Justice Patterson, that in relocation cases neither parent has a right superior to the best interests of the child. In doing so, the court abandoned the presumption that “what is good for the custodial parent is good for the child.” Bisbing v. Bisbing, __ N.J. __ (2017).
When Jaime and Glenn Bisbing divorced, after an eight-year marriage, their property settlement agreement provided for joint legal custody, with Jaime being the custodial parent of their seven-year-old twin daughters. However, following their divorce, Glenn was actively involved in the children’s lives. He coached their soccer and ski teams, supervised their church activities and, because Jaime left for her New York job very early in the morning, he helped get the children off to school several times per week. Their property settlement also ”acknowledge(d) that the Children’s quality of life and style of life are provided equally by Husband and Wife.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
