3. Under current law, if parent A has either sole or joint legal custody and
physical placement with the child for the greater period of time, parent B may
request modification of the legal custody or physical placement order, there is a
rebuttable presumption that continuing the physical placement with parent A for
the greater period of time is in the child's best interest, and parent B has the burden
of proving that modification of the legal custody or physical placement order is in the
child's best interest. Under the bill, parent B may request modification of the legal
custody or physical placement order, is subject to the rebuttable presumption that
the current allocation of physical placement is in the child's best interest, and has
the burden of proving that modification is in the child's best interest if parent A has
physical placement with the child for at least 90 percent of the time.
4. Under current law, if the parents have joint legal custody and substantially
equal periods of physical placement, either parent may request modification of the
legal custody or physical placement order. The court may grant the request if the
court finds that circumstances make it impractical for the parents to continue to have
substantially equal periods of physical placement and the modification is in the best
interest of the child. The parent requesting the modification has the burden of proof.
The bill changes this so that either parent may request modification of the legal
custody or physical placement order if parent A has sole or joint legal custody and
physical placement for less than 90 percent of the time. In addition, the bill creates
a rebuttable presumption that it is in the child's best interest to remain in the
community to which the child has become adjusted, requires the court to modify legal
custody or physical placement if the court makes the findings required under current
law, and changes the burden of proof to the parent proposing the move or removal,
regardless of which parent requests modification of the legal custody or physical
placement order. Thus, if parent B requests modification of the legal custody or
physical placement order, parent A must prove that modification is not in the child's
best interest, and if parent A requests the modification, parent A must prove that
modification is in the child's best interest.
5. Under current law, the court may prohibit the move or removal on the
request of parent B if parent A has sole or joint legal custody, parent A has physical
placement for the greater period of time or the parents have substantially equal

periods of physical placement, and the court finds that prohibiting the move or
removal is in the child's best interest. Parent B, who is requesting that the move or
removal be prohibited, has the burden of proving that prohibiting the move or
removal is in the child's best interest. The bill changes this so that, regardless of the
allocation of physical placement, the court must prohibit the move or removal on the
request of parent B unless the court finds that prohibiting the move or removal would
be harmful to the child's best interest. The burden of proof is also changed so that
parent A has the burden of proving that prohibiting the move or removal would be
harmful to the child's best interest.
6. Current law sets out factors that the court must consider for making its
determinations, such as whether the proposed action is reasonable and the nature
and extent of the child's relationship with parent B. Current law also provides that
the court may consider the child's adjustment to the home, school, religion, and
community. The bill eliminates that factor, which the court may, but is not required
to, consider.
7. Finally, the bill provides that, if the court does not prohibit the move or
removal, the court must require parent A to pay for some or all of any additional
transportation costs that parent B incurs in exercising physical placement with the
child as a result of the move or removal, based on each party's ability to pay.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do
enact as follows:
AB462, s. 1 1Section 1. 767.481 (1) (a) 2. of the statutes is amended to read:
AB462,3,42 767.481 (1) (a) 2. Establish Except as provided in subd. 2m., establish his or
3her legal residence with the child at any location within this state that is at a distance
4of 150 miles or more from the other parent.
AB462, s. 2 5Section 2. 767.481 (1) (a) 2m. of the statutes is created to read:
AB462,3,86 767.481 (1) (a) 2m. If the parent's current residence is less than 20 miles from
7the other parent, establish his or her legal residence with the child at any location
8within this state that is at a distance of 20 miles or more from the other parent.
AB462, s. 3 9Section 3. 767.481 (1) (a) 2r. of the statutes is created to read:
AB462,3,1210 767.481 (1) (a) 2r. If the child is in kindergarten to grade 12, establish his or
11her legal residence with the child in a school district that is different from the one
12in which the child currently resides.
AB462, s. 4
1Section 4. 767.481 (3) (a) 1. (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read:
AB462,4,92 767.481 (3) (a) 1. (intro.) Except as provided under par. (b), if the parent
3proposing the move or removal has sole legal or joint legal custody of the child and
4has physical placement with the child resides with that parent for the greater period
5for at least 90 percent of time, the parent objecting to the move or removal may file
6a petition, motion, or order to show cause for modification of the legal custody or
7physical placement order affecting the child. The court may modify the legal custody
8or physical placement order if, after considering the factors under sub. (5), the court
9finds all of the following:
AB462, s. 5 10Section 5. 767.481 (3) (a) 2. a. of the statutes is amended to read:
AB462,4,1611 767.481 (3) (a) 2. a. There is a rebuttable presumption that continuing the
12current allocation of decision making under a legal custody order or continuing the
13child's current allocation of physical placement with the parent with whom the child
14resides for the greater period of time
is in the best interest of the child. This
15presumption may be overcome by a showing that the move or removal is
16unreasonable and not in the best interest of the child.
AB462, s. 6 17Section 6. 767.481 (3) (b) 1. (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read:
AB462,4,2418 767.481 (3) (b) 1. (intro.) If the parents have parent proposing the move or
19removal has sole legal or
joint legal custody of the child and substantially equal
20periods of
has physical placement with the child for less than 90 percent of the time,
21either parent may file a petition, motion, or order to show cause for modification of
22the legal custody or physical placement order. The court may shall modify an order
23of legal custody or physical placement if, after considering the factors under sub. (5),
24the court finds all of the following:
AB462, s. 7 25Section 7. 767.481 (3) (b) 1. a. of the statutes is amended to read:
AB462,5,3
1767.481 (3) (b) 1. a. Circumstances make it impractical for the parties to
2continue to have substantially equal periods the current allocation of physical
3placement.
AB462, s. 8 4Section 8. 767.481 (3) (b) 1m. of the statutes is created to read:
AB462,5,75 767.481 (3) (b) 1m. With respect to subd. 1., there is a rebuttable presumption
6that it is in the child's best interest to remain in the community to which the child
7has become adjusted before the proposed move or removal.
AB462, s. 9 8Section 9. 767.481 (3) (b) 2. of the statutes is amended to read:
AB462,5,109 767.481 (3) (b) 2. Under this paragraph, the burden of proof is on the parent
10filing the petition, motion or order to show cause proposing the move or removal.
AB462, s. 10 11Section 10. 767.481 (3) (c) 1. of the statutes is amended to read:
AB462,5,2112 767.481 (3) (c) 1. If the parent proposing the move or removal has sole legal or
13joint legal custody of the child and the child resides with that parent for the greater
14period of time or the parents have substantially equal periods of physical placement
15with the child
, regardless of the allocation of physical placement, as an alternative
16to the petition, motion, or order to show cause under par. (a) or (b), the parent
17objecting to the move or removal may file a petition, motion, or order to show cause
18for an order prohibiting the move or removal. The court may shall prohibit the move
19or removal if unless, after considering the factors under sub. (5), the court finds that
20the prohibition is in prohibiting the move or removal would be harmful to the best
21interest of the child.
AB462, s. 11 22Section 11. 767.481 (3) (c) 2. of the statutes is amended to read:
AB462,5,2423 767.481 (3) (c) 2. Under this paragraph, the burden of proof is on the parent
24objecting to proposing the move or removal.
AB462, s. 12 25Section 12. 767.481 (4m) of the statutes is created to read:
AB462,6,5
1767.481 (4m) Payment of additional transportation costs. If the court does
2not prohibit the move or removal, the court shall require the parent proposing the
3move or removal to pay for some or all of any additional transportation costs that the
4other parent, as a result of the move or removal, will incur in exercising periods of
5physical placement with the child, based on each party's ability to pay.
AB462, s. 13 6Section 13. 767.481 (5m) (intro.) and (b) of the statutes are consolidated,
7renumbered 767.481 (5m) and amended to read:
AB462,6,118 767.481 (5m) Other factors factor. In making a determination under sub.
9(3): (b) The, the court may not use the availability of electronic communication as
10a factor in support of a modification of a physical placement order or in support of a
11refusal to prohibit a move.
AB462, s. 14 12Section 14. 767.481 (5m) (a) of the statutes is repealed.
AB462, s. 15 13Section 15. 767.481 (7) of the statutes is created to read:
AB462,6,2214 767.481 (7) Contempt of court. If a parent who is required to provide notice
15under sub. (1) or (6) (a) moves with or removes the child without or before providing
16notice in violation of the order under sub. (1) or in violation of sub. (6) (a), or if a parent
17who receives a notice of objection under sub. (2) (a) moves with or removes the child
18before the dispute is resolved or the final order of the court under sub. (3) in violation
19of sub. (2) (b), the court shall find the parent who moves with or removes the child
20in contempt of court under ch. 785, upon the motion of the other parent, and shall
21order the parent who moves with or removes the child to pay the court costs and,
22notwithstanding s. 814.04 (1), reasonable attorney fees incurred by the other parent.
AB462, s. 16 23Section 16. Initial applicability.
AB462,7,3
1(1) The treatment of section 767.481 (1) (a) 2., 2m., and 2r. of the statutes first
2applies to orders requiring parents to provide written notice of an intention to move
3with or remove a child that are made on the effective date of this subsection.
AB462,7,74 (2) The treatment of section 767.481 (3) (a) 1. (intro.) and 2. a., (b) 1. (intro.) and
5a., 1m., and 2., and (c) 1. and 2., (4m), (5m) (intro.), (a), and (b), and (7) of the statutes
6first applies to moves or removals for which written notice is required on the effective
7date of this subsection.
AB462,7,88 (End)
Loading...
Loading...