USA – NEW YORK Trends and Developments Contributed by: Eleanor B. Alter, Adam John Wolff, Jenifer J. Foley and MaryJane Gurriell, Alter Wolff Foley & Stutman LLP
present enforcement difficulties. However, those con - cerns may be highly relevant to the court’s assessment of stability, risk, parental good faith, and the likelihood that future custody orders can be effectively enforced. Passports, dual citizenship, and travel controls Passport provisions have become increasingly impor - tant components of custody agreements involving affluent international families. A child may simultaneously possess a United States passport and qualify for citizenship or travel documen - tation elsewhere. Restricting access to one passport may therefore provide only partial protection. For that reason, carefully drafted custody agreements com - monly address: • possession of passports; • disclosure of travel documents; • procedures for obtaining new or replacement pass - ports; • written travel consent requirements; • advance notice provisions; • travel itineraries; The objective should not be to prevent legitimate international travel. Rather, the goal is to create clear and enforceable procedures that accommodate a family’s international lifestyle while reducing the risk of future disputes. Where dual nationality is involved, consultation with foreign counsel may be necessary because domes - tic court orders do not necessarily prevent a foreign government from issuing travel documents to one of its citizens. As international mobility continues to increase, passport provisions are likely to remain a growing area of focus in custody negotiations and litigation. Child support, relocation, and travel costs Relocation frequently produces significant financial consequences that extend beyond ordinary child sup - port obligations. • permitted destinations; and • return-date requirements.
Interstate and international moves may require air - fare, accommodations, transportation, international insurance coverage, travel documents, and additional housing arrangements necessary to facilitate a child’s relationship with both parents. These expenses can become particularly substantial in wealthy families where travel occurs frequently and across great dis - tances. Child support and relocation expenses Although child support obligations remain gov - erned by the Child Support Standards Act, reloca - tion often generates additional expenses that are not fully addressed through ordinary support calculations. Courts therefore regularly undertake a separate analy - sis concerning transportation and travel costs. Among the most common questions are: • Which parent pays transportation costs? • Should costs be allocated according to income? • Should the relocating parent assume greater responsibility? • Should parental travel expenses be considered? • How should international travel disruptions be addressed? Because these questions frequently outlast the relo - cation dispute itself, parties benefit from addressing them directly in both settlement negotiations and relo - cation applications. The cost of maintaining the parent - child relationship New York courts have developed a variety of approach - es for allocating the costs associated with maintaining a child’s relationship with the non-relocating parent after a move. In Corydon YY . v Laura ZZ ., 117 A.D.3d 1116 (3d Dep’t 2019), the court approved a reduction in child-support obligations to account for transportation expenses incurred in facilitating parenting time. In Latoya B . v Marvin D ., 191 A.D.3d 1123 (3d Dep’t 2021), the court required the parents to share travel expenses associated with transportation between Ari - zona and New York. The decision reflected the court’s effort to balance support obligations with the practical
205 C HILD RELOC AT I ON 20 26
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook