child when the evidence clearly establishes that relocation is in the minor child's best interest when all factors set forth in section six o nine point two of the yellow line marriage and dissolution of marriage act are considered and weighed properly the evidence presented to the circuit court in this case clearly establishes that relocation to north carolina has in jet's best interest the circuit court's ruling was against manifest weight of the evidence and must be reverse to note that the only supreme court tells us in the ecker case that a determination of the best interest of a minor child cannot be reduced to a simple bright line test but rather must be made on a case by case basis depending to great extent on the specific circumstances of each case in the instant case first when addressing the circumstances and reasons that i was requesting relocation the circuit court fail to recognize the substantial indirect benefit that derive from the enhanced and of abbie's live by the relocation to north carolina second the circuit court failed to properly consider the history and quality of each parents relationship to the child by minimizing the fact that abby has been jet primary caretaker and sole decision maker since his birth but minimal participation by zach other than the agreed upon parenting time allotted to third circuit court or by finding that a reasonable parenting time schedule must be established that maintains x current level of involvement with jack and finally the circuit court air filter properly analyze the facts with regard to the presence an absence of extended family at the existing location in the proposed new location in addition zach was in a no evidence of the circuit court that establishes that jett would be disadvantaged or harmed by a change in contact with his extended family ye which is similar to the case at hand that a circuit court must consider the proposed move in terms of the like of the poor and he is in the general quality of life for both the child and the custodial parent the best interest of the child can be easily severed from the interest of the coasts are you a parent with whom the child minor child resides and his mental and physical well being the child primarily depends because the principal burden and responsibility of child bearing falls upon the custodial parent there is a palpable nexus between the custodial parents quality of life in the child's quality of life calling one step forward that some differences due to the custodial parent who has already must prove more than his or her own desire to live with a new spouse the instant case is very similar to should all be harder with a few porton distinctions the mother's new marriage in that case was her third serious relationship and six years after having one child with a former spouse and child with a father that case the measure married her husband after knowing him for only ten months this court found that that evidence points to the that the mother was somewhat impulsive based on the evidence presented the mother's argument of my child's quality of life i would be enhanced was little more than speculation nothing introduced in this case suggest that abby is impulsive sixteen and abby just gave birth to their minor daughter vera in may of twenty seventeen housing military has stationed at camp le jean he does not have the ability to open roots illinois to reside with abby and he wishes to move jets north previously married and has a child from that marriage so that has been able to reside with his current fiance and her children and their two parent home he understands having them and the support of another adult in the household having a child with abby has not limited his ability to fall in love again and create a family environment that he enjoys today and he now seeks to enjoy the same traditional environment however she is only able to provide that to jet if the court to relocate would have some effect on everyone involved however the initial destruction caused by that move will be outweighed by the benefits resulting to jet from that the circuit court in this case found the abbey wants to move to north carolina start a family with her husband but as intentions are so much more than that by bringing any permission to move jessie north carolina she can be with her cousin greatest jet and his baby sister and i two parent traditional family environment provide greater financial security so the enroll to it in a school system with comparable education and extracurricular opportunities and for transportation and direct regular electronic contact a abby has been the primary here taker and decision maker zach to not become involved which at until he was approximately eight or until he was approached by abby the take a paternity test when jett was about three months old had minimal communication with jets teacher and he has regular contact with her anywhere from one to two days per week abby registered jets were running clubs when swimming lessons and soccer and slowly bears the expense of all of those activities church and hasn't since two thousand and six when he was previously married again there's so much more to parenting than exercising parenting time this factor should be given substantial way the circuit court  denied as long as a reasonable and realistic schedule can be created the quality of the parent child relationship need not be adversely affected because that relationship becomes a long distance one the fourth district  ack she sought him out during pregnancy and after jets birth and ensure the establishment of the relationship between jack and zach she agreed to extensive visitation requests by zach without the necessity of contested litigation and has fostered  facilitated that time as well as the relationship between them since the appearance in agreement was honored that rejects the relocation because he wants to be in a day to day relationship with jack however this preference is insufficient to change a state holidays off of work and also includes long periods during school breaks and a majority of the summer during which second jet second get jet involved in sports and activities and be involved as well zach can provide a safe and loving home environment during these long visits away from abby and there is no evidence presented to suggest that such a standard time would be a good against jets best interest in addition although it cannot take place of in person parenting time technology today is such that zach and jet didn't have face to face contact daily there's no evidence to suggest that their relationship would somehow be diminished if relocation were allowed of words if  surely it would not surely would be improper that her facilitation of extensive time and contact between zach and zach in jet now be held against her there is no valid evidence presented that suggests that the relationship will grow weaker if the court were to fashion a new parenting schedule upon allowing abby to move to north carolina in fact it's possible to fashion a schedule that would preserve the relationship between them finally the circuit court dealt a properly analyze the facts with regard to the pres or absence of extended family existing location and that the proposed new location the fourth district stated in ford be martinus that the effect of the removal on the child's contact with his grandparents is a valid consideration but when however the court failed to properly analyze the facts with regard to this factor zach's parents reside two hours from here and there is some question as to how often they see jett they were not called as witnesses while they do likely have a good relationship with jett there's no reason to suggest that they cannot continue to have contact with him brings x parenting time and otherwise electronically abby's mother testified that her and her husband see jett often although they do not reside in peoria either  anticipates that a jet resides in north carolina she'll be able to see him every four to six weeks she is retired and she will be able to travel the circuit court heard and finding that this factor clearly favors the denial of relocation no evidence was presented that shows that chet would be disadvantaged or harmed by a change in contact with his grandparents so as to make this a determining factor but this factor alone may not favor relocation it should be given little way ma'am a moment to complete really respectfully request that this court reversed the order of the statutory factors and giving each its appropriate a consideration the trial court's terminations was not against the best interest of the course determination that it was not unjust bess's rest to the river relocate aside the court's determination simply because she believes a different conclusion should could have been drawn from the evidence the evidence that was below with respect to the various statutory factors does not unequivocally support the mother's claim that the friends know relatives other than abby a step father and once their sibling was live in north carolina col has never heard of jet or live with yet and has been very little time with him tom or really  mean latchkey there is no dispute that exact has a good relationship with jeff the substitution of intermittent extended periods of parenting time for zack's nearly nearly daily contact with the reduced real time opportunities for me one reaction between father and son and invariably weaken their bond technology will be a poor substitute for in person contact for a easier for kyle to come live in illinois rather than up with jack and move him to north carolina instead and he's making on banking on jets resilience and perceived capacity to make new friends apart from a  think that quote happiness pales in comparison to the best interest of the child when the child is separated by distance from a parent who has been involved in child day to day activities in the extended family members who have a closely aligned work schedules which maximize the amount of quality time that he has with zero parents in contrast the evidence is that college work hours will be six am to six pm with work days even comes home that day memory there is no support system in existence in north carolina other than the stepfather at this point at that point here and then any improvement and abby's financial the quality of just life will not be improved i mean losing his regular in close contact with his extended family that relocation of jet reliable jet will interact with his father less personally and less often against the minute as whether the evidence and should be affirmed by this or there are any questions relationship may be a long distance relationship it is a quite an extensive relationship they have visited were with one another and kyle met jett before zach met jett so kyle has been a part of this this family for quite some time  they didn't and they aren't going to be able to until the court allows her to relocate kyle is never parent a jet that's correct in home he has never been to chat but most parents don't parent until they become parents so he hasn't had the chance yet to  hired does not have the ability to move to illinois he's stationed in north carolina and he will not be able to move back he's a marine and he stuck there pretty much until you retires in september of twenty two thousand and twenty two the situation and do understand that he's married with a family and he would have some leniency that way and so he is hopeful that they would keep him stationed there all evidence presented by the witnesses set forth that jet carolina opposing counsel argues that there's no proof that that the financial circumstances of abby would be any better north carolina however that she will move from a one income home to a two good income home where wouldn't she contributing to their financial financially to them right now however they're living in two separate households at the point at this point they're having to pay for two separate households so in a situation abby could move in they can live under one roof together with their finances  grandparents or in that time as well i would like to point out that the calling borne case that's fourth again that if the direct benefits that affected children were considered if only the direct benefits that affected the children were considered rarely would a situation arise where removal would be permitted when children are in a good environment with good schools good parents and friends we do have that here in a good environment he has good school he's in a good school he has good friends this is that he has a wonderful family but we cannot just consider just the direct benefits to jet the indirect benefits by hand that will be had by the middle to north carolina must be considered and are very i would just reiterate your honour's that you have a dense when considering all of the statutory factors and getting the proper amount of weight to each factor considering the circuit court's ruling it was picked the evidence clearly establishes that