C.D. v. R.C.

3. C.D. v. R.C.

Citation: 2026 WL 190995 (Conn. App. Jan. 27, 2026), AC 46958

Relevant Facts

  • The parties met in 2016 and have one child born in March 2017.
  • In 2017, the plaintiff purchased a home in Stamford, Connecticut where the parties lived together.
  • In June 2018, after the relationship broke down, the defendant traveled to Virginia with the child and remained there.
  • Plaintiff commenced a child custody/visitation action in August 2018.
  • Defendant filed a motion in March 2019 to relocate with the child to Virginia.

Legal Issues

Whether the trial court applied improper legal standards in considering the defendant's request to relocate; and whether the trial court abused its discretion in analyzing the child's best interests.

Decision by the Court

The trial court determined relocation to Virginia was in the child's best interests. Joint legal custody was awarded to both parties; primary physical custody was awarded to the defendant with permission to relocate. The appellate court affirmed.

Reasons for the Decision

The court properly applied Connecticut General Statutes sec. 46b-56(c). Factual findings supported the decision: relocation would improve circumstances with lower cost of living, proximity to maternal family, and secured employment.

Need Legal Assistance in Puerto Rico?

Riefkohl Law provides experienced legal counsel across a wide range of practice areas. Explore our resources:

Call (787) 236-1657 or schedule a consultation to discuss your legal needs.

Previous
Previous

Thomas C. McGill v. U.S. Bank, N.A.

Next
Next

McGill v. U.S. Bank, N.A.