David Stills v. Amber Stills

Summary

The court affirmed the circuit court’s refusal to enforce the parties’ agreement purporting to waive the relocation presumption and shift the relocation burden to the custodial parent. It held that the presumption is a legal burden of proof governing relocation disputes, not a waivable party right, and concluded that the circuit court applied the correct custody-modification standard and did not clearly err in denying a custody change or approving relocation. Chief Justice Hannah and Justice Brown, dissenting, would have held that the presumption was based on the custodial parent’s right to travel and could be waived by agreement.