Fouth-Tchos v. Mahob (2018) & Litigating Relocation in Maryland

Our current society is more mobile than it has been at any other time in history. Not only do people move more frequently across state lines than they did in the past, they also relocate outside the country more often as well. Modern transportation has certainly aided this trend, but so have other advanced technologies. Modern communication technology, in the form of the internet, cell phones, and so forth, have completely altered the landscape of the professional world, and made it much easier for people to work remotely. When parents want to relocate, the issue of relocation has to be handled in the court system. The reason for this is obvious: one parent shouldn’t be allowed to simply pack up and relocate across the country – or, to another country altogether – without first settling this matter through the proper channel. If one parent had the ability to just relocate unilaterally, without any restrictions, this could easily lead to a very problematic situation, and could jeopardize many custody arrangements.

In the case of Fouth-Tchos v. Mahob (2018), the Maryland court system had to handle a case involving one parent who sought relocation in another country – in this case, Germany. Let’s go through this case in detail and discuss some of the relevant points with respect to the issue of relocation.

Overview of Fouth-Tchos v. Mahob (2018)

The mother and father in this case met in Germany. The father was a geophysicist and the mother was a medical doctor. The mother was licensed to practice medicine in Europe, but the couple relocated to the U.S. prior to marriage. The couple settled in Texas, and was married in that state. Eventually, the couple separated, and the mother moved to Montgomery County, Maryland, following the divorce. In the initial custody order, the mother was granted the ability to determine the primary residence of the children, which meant that she more or less could freely move when she desired. When she relocated to Maryland, she officially “registered” the Texas custody decree in Maryland, which made that preexisting order legally enforceable by Maryland courts.

The mother decided to accept an offer of employment in Europe, and made it clear that she intended to relocate with the children. When she tried to obtain court approval for this relocation, however, the court stated that she was limited in her relocation to areas within the United States. The Maryland court effectively altered the preexisting custody order when it determined that relocation was limited to places within the U.S. This meant that, to move to Europe, the mother would need to modify the preexisting order. The mother proceeded to try to modify the order, as it was altered by the Maryland court, so that she could relocate to Europe. She lost at the trial court level and then appealed.

Outcome & Discussion

The appellate division upheld the trial court ruling. At the appellate review, the court stated that, to modify an existing order, the party seeking modification must cite a material change in circumstances such that the modification is justified. The mother cited two reasons as to why this hurdle should be met: (1) the father failed to pay child support consistently, and (2)failing to allow the relocation would create an undue financial hardship on the children. The court rejected both arguments, and found that, although the father had failed to make payments on certain occasions, the failure was no this fault. There were administrative problems associated with a change in his employment, and so the failure to transfer the funds was not his fault. In order for the mother’s argument to succeed, fault would’ve been necessary. Next, to allow the mother’s second argument to succeed, the court would’ve needed to find that the children were currently struggling from poor economic conditions, but that wasn’t the case. The mother’s present occupation allowed her to provide a very comfortable situation for the children, and so relocation wasn’t a matter of financial necessity at all.

Contact the Murphy Law Firm for Additional Resources

If you need additional information on the issue of relocation, or another related family law issue, don’t hesitate to contact one of the attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-9311.