RCW 26.09.405
Applicability.
(1) The provisions of RCW 26.09.405
through
26.09.560
and the chapter 21, Laws of 2000 amendments to RCW 26.09.260, *
26.10.190, and
26.26B.090
apply to a court order regarding residential time or visitation with a child issued:
(a) After June 8, 2000; and
(b) Before June 8, 2000, if the existing court order does not expressly govern relocation of the child.
(2) To the extent that a provision of RCW 26.09.405
through
26.09.560
and the chapter 21, Laws of 2000 amendments to RCW 26.09.260, *
26.10.190, and
26.26B.090
conflicts with the express terms of a court order existing prior to June 8, 2000, then RCW 26.09.405
through
26.09.560
and the chapter 21, Laws of 2000 amendments to RCW 26.09.260, *
26.10.190, and
26.26B.090
do not apply to those terms of that order governing relocation of the child.
(3) The provisions of RCW 26.09.405
through
26.09.560
do not apply to visitation orders entered in dependency proceedings as provided in RCW 13.34.385
.
[
2019 c 46 s 5021
;
2008 c 259 s 2
;
2000 c 21 s 3
.]
NOTES:
*Reviser's note:
Chapter
26.10
RCW, with the exception of RCW 26.10.115, was repealed by
2020 c 312 s 905
. RCW 26.10.115
was repealed by 2021 c 215 s 170, effective July 1, 2022.
Intent
—
2000 c 21:
"By this act, the legislature intends to supersede the state supreme court's decisions In Re the Marriage of Littlefield, 133 Wn.2d 39 (1997), and In Re the Marriage of Pape, Docket No. 67527-9, December 23, 1999." [
2000 c 21 s 1
.]
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
"Captions used in this act are not any part of the law." [
2000 c 21 s 22
.]
RCW 26.09.410
Definitions.
The definitions in this section apply throughout RCW 26.09.405
through
26.09.560
and
26.09.260
unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
(1) "Court order" means a temporary or permanent parenting plan, custody order, visitation order, or other order governing the residence of a child under this title.
(2) "Relocate" means a change in principal residence either permanently or for a protracted period of time, or a change in residence in cases where parents have substantially equal residential time as defined by RCW 26.09.525
.
[
2019 c 79 s 4
;
2000 c 21 s 2
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.420
Grant of authority.
When entering or modifying a court order, the court has the authority to allow or not allow a person to relocate the child.
[
2000 c 21 s 4
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.430
Notice requirement.
Except as provided in RCW 26.09.460, a person with whom the child resides a majority of the time, or a person with substantially equal residential time, shall notify every other person entitled to residential time or visitation with the child under a court order if the person intends to relocate. Notice shall be given as prescribed in RCW 26.09.440
and
26.09.450
.
[
2019 c 79 s 2
;
2000 c 21 s 5
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.440
Notice
—
Contents and delivery.
(1) Except as provided in RCW 26.09.450
and
26.09.460, the notice of an intended relocation of the child must be given by:
(a) Personal service or any form of mail requiring a return receipt; and
(b) No less than:
(i) Sixty days before the date of the intended relocation of the child; or
(ii) No more than five days after the date that the person knows the information required to be furnished under subsection (2) of this section, if the person did not know and could not reasonably have known the information in sufficient time to provide the sixty-days' notice, and it is not reasonable to delay the relocation.
(2)(a) The notice of intended relocation of the child must include: (i) An address at which service of process may be accomplished during the period for objection; (ii) a brief statement of the specific reasons for the intended relocation of the child; and (iii) a notice to the nonrelocating person that an objection to the intended relocation of the child or to the relocating person's proposed revised residential schedule must be filed with the court and served on the opposing person within thirty days or the relocation of the child will be permitted and the residential schedule may be modified pursuant to RCW 26.09.500
. The notice shall not be deemed to be in substantial compliance for purposes of RCW 26.09.470
unless the notice contains the following statement: "THE RELOCATION OF THE CHILD WILL BE PERMITTED AND THE PROPOSED REVISED RESIDENTIAL SCHEDULE MAY BE CONFIRMED UNLESS, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS, YOU FILE A PETITION AND MOTION WITH THE COURT TO BLOCK THE RELOCATION OR OBJECT TO THE PROPOSED REVISED RESIDENTIAL SCHEDULE AND SERVE THE PETITION AND MOTION ON THE PERSON PROPOSING RELOCATION AND ALL OTHER PERSONS ENTITLED BY COURT ORDER TO RESIDENTIAL TIME OR VISITATION WITH THE CHILD."
(b) Except as provided in RCW 26.09.450
and
26.09.460, the following information shall also be included in every notice of intended relocation of the child, if available:
(i) The specific street address of the intended new residence, if known, or as much of the intended address as is known, such as city and state;
(ii) The new mailing address, if different from the intended new residence address;
(iii) The new home telephone number;
(iv) The name and address of the child's new school and day care facility, if applicable;
(v) The date of the intended relocation of the child; and
(vi) A proposal in the form of a proposed parenting plan for a revised schedule of residential time or visitation with the child, if any.
(3) A person required to give notice of an intended relocation of the child has a continuing duty to promptly update the information required with the notice as that new information becomes known.
[
2000 c 21 s 6
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.450
Notice
—
Relocation within the same school district.
(1) When the intended relocation of the child is within the school district in which the child currently resides the majority of the time, the person intending to relocate the child, in lieu of notice prescribed in RCW 26.09.440, may provide actual notice by any reasonable means to every other person entitled to residential time or visitation with the child under a court order.
(2) A person who is entitled to residential time or visitation with the child under a court order may not object to the intended relocation of the child within the school district in which the child currently resides the majority of the time, but he or she retains the right to move for modification under RCW 26.09.260
.
[
2000 c 21 s 7
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.460
Limitation of notices.
(1) If a person intending to relocate the child is entering a domestic violence shelter due to the danger imposed by another person, notice may be delayed for twenty-one days. This section shall not be construed to compel the disclosure by any domestic violence shelter of information protected by confidentiality except as provided by RCW 70.123.075
or equivalent laws of the state in which the shelter is located.
(2) If a person intending to relocate the child is a participant in the address confidentiality program pursuant to chapter
40.24
RCW or has a court order which permits the party to withhold some or all of the information required by RCW 26.09.440
(2)(b), the confidential or protected information is not required to be given with the notice.
(3) If a person intending to relocate the child is relocating to avoid a clear, immediate, and unreasonable risk to the health or safety of a person or the child, notice may be delayed for twenty-one days.
(4) A person intending to relocate the child who believes that his or her health or safety or the health or safety of the child would be unreasonably put at risk by notice or disclosure of certain information in the notice may request an ex parte hearing with the court to have all or part of the notice requirements waived. If the court finds that the health or safety of a person or a child would be unreasonably put at risk by notice or the disclosure of certain information in the notice, the court may:
(a) Order that the notice requirements be less than complete or waived to the extent necessary to protect confidentiality or the health or safety of a person or child; or
(b) Provide such other relief as the court finds necessary to facilitate the legitimate needs of the parties and the best interests of the child under the circumstances.
(5) This section does not deprive a person entitled to residential time or visitation with a child under a court order the opportunity to object to the intended relocation of the child or the proposed revised residential schedule before the relocation occurs.
[
2000 c 21 s 8
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.470
Failure to give notice.
(1) The failure to provide the required notice is grounds for sanctions, including contempt if applicable.
(2) In determining whether a person has failed to comply with the notice requirements for the purposes of this section, the court may consider whether:
(a) The person has substantially complied with the notice requirements;
(b) The court order in effect at the time of the relocation was issued prior to June 8, 2000, and the person substantially complied with the notice requirements, if any, in the existing order;
(c) A waiver of notice was granted;
(d) A person entitled to receive notice was substantially harmed; and
(e) Any other factor the court deems relevant.
(3) A person entitled to file an objection to the intended relocation of the child may file such objection whether or not the person has received proper notice.
[
2000 c 21 s 9
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.480
Objection to relocation or proposed revised residential schedule.
(1) A party objecting to the intended relocation of the child or the relocating parent's proposed revised residential schedule shall do so by filing the objection with the court and serving the objection on the relocating party and all other persons entitled by court order to residential time or visitation with the child by means of personal service or mailing by any form of mail requiring a return receipt to the relocating party at the address designated for service on the notice of intended relocation and to other parties requiring notice at their mailing address. The objection must be filed and served, including a three-day waiting period if the objection is served by mail, within thirty days of receipt of the notice of intended relocation of the child. The objection shall be in the form of: (a) A petition for modification of the parenting plan pursuant to relocation; or (b) other court proceeding adequate to provide grounds for relief.
(2) Unless the special circumstances described in RCW 26.09.460
apply, the person intending to relocate the child shall not, without a court order, change the principal residence of the child during the period in which a party may object. The order required under this subsection may be obtained ex parte. If the objecting party notes a court hearing to prevent the relocation of the child for a date not more than fifteen days following timely service of an objection to relocation, the party intending to relocate the child shall not change the principal residence of the child pending the hearing unless the special circumstances described in RCW 26.09.460
(3) apply.
(3) The administrator for the courts shall develop a standard form, separate from existing dissolution or modification forms, for use in filing an objection to relocation of the child or objection of the relocating person's proposed revised residential schedule.
[
2000 c 21 s 10
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.490
Required provision in residential orders.
Unless waived by court order, after June 8, 2000, every court order shall include a clear restatement of the provisions in RCW 26.09.430
through
26.09.480
.
[
2000 c 21 s 11
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.500
Failure to object.
(1) Except for good cause shown, if a person entitled to object to the relocation of the child does not file an objection with the court within thirty days after receipt of the relocation notice, then the relocation of the child shall be permitted.
(2) A nonobjecting person shall be entitled to the residential time or visitation with the child specified in the proposed residential schedule included with the relocation notice.
(3) Any person entitled to residential time or visitation with a child under a court order retains his or her right to move for modification under RCW 26.09.260
.
(4) If a person entitled to object to the relocation of the child does not file an objection with the court within thirty days after receipt of the relocation notice, a person entitled to residential time with the child may not be held in contempt of court for any act or omission that is in compliance with the proposed revised residential schedule set forth in the notice given.
(5) Any party entitled to residential time or visitation with the child under a court order may, after thirty days have elapsed since the receipt of the notice, obtain ex parte and file with the court an order modifying the residential schedule in conformity with the relocating party's proposed residential schedule specified in the notice upon filing a copy of the notice and proof of service of such notice. A party may obtain ex parte and file with the court an order modifying the residential schedule in conformity with the proposed residential schedule specified in the notice before the thirty days have elapsed if the party files a copy of the notice, proof of service of such notice, and proof that no objection will be filed.
[
2000 c 21 s 12
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.510
Temporary orders.
(1) The court may grant a temporary order restraining relocation of the child, or ordering return of the child if the child's relocation has occurred, if the court finds:
(a) The required notice of an intended relocation of the child was not provided in a timely manner and the nonrelocating party was substantially prejudiced;
(b) The relocation of the child has occurred without agreement of the parties, court order, or the notice required by RCW 26.09.405
through
26.09.560
and the chapter 21, Laws of 2000 amendments to RCW 26.09.260, *
26.10.190, and
26.26B.090
; or
(c) After examining evidence presented at a hearing for temporary orders in which the parties had adequate opportunity to prepare and be heard, there is a likelihood that on final hearing the court will not approve the intended relocation of the child or no circumstances exist sufficient to warrant a relocation of the child prior to a final determination at trial.
(2) The court may grant a temporary order authorizing the intended relocation of the child pending final hearing if the court finds:
(a) The required notice of an intended relocation of the child was provided in a timely manner or that the circumstances otherwise warrant issuance of a temporary order in the absence of compliance with the notice requirements and issues an order for a revised schedule for residential time with the child; and
(b) After examining the evidence presented at a hearing for temporary orders in which the parties had adequate opportunity to prepare and be heard, there is a likelihood that on final hearing the court will approve the intended relocation of the child.
[
2019 c 46 s 5022
;
2000 c 21 s 13
.]
NOTES:
*Reviser's note:
Chapter
26.10
RCW, with the exception of RCW 26.10.115, was repealed by
2020 c 312 s 905
. RCW 26.10.115
was repealed by 2021 c 215 s 170, effective July 1, 2022.
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.520
Basis for determination.
The person proposing to relocate with the child shall provide his or her reasons for the intended relocation. There is a rebuttable presumption that the intended relocation of the child will be permitted. A person entitled to object to the intended relocation of the child may rebut the presumption by demonstrating that the detrimental effect of the relocation outweighs the benefit of the change to the child and the relocating person, based upon the following factors. The factors listed in this section are not weighted. No inference is to be drawn from the order in which the following factors are listed:
(1) The relative strength, nature, quality, extent of involvement, and stability of the child's relationship with each parent, siblings, and other significant persons in the child's life;
(2) Prior agreements of the parties;
(3) Whether disrupting the contact between the child and the person seeking relocation would be more detrimental to the child than disrupting contact between the child and the person objecting to the relocation;
(4) Whether either parent or a person entitled to residential time with the child is subject to limitations under RCW 26.09.191
or
26.09.192
;
(5) The reasons of each person for seeking or opposing the relocation and the good faith of each of the parties in requesting or opposing the relocation;
(6) The age, developmental stage, and needs of the child, and the likely impact the relocation or its prevention will have on the child's physical, educational, and emotional development, taking into consideration any special needs of the child;
(7) The quality of life, resources, and opportunities available to the child and to the relocating party in the current and proposed geographic locations;
(8) The availability of alternative arrangements to foster and continue the child's relationship with and access to the other parent;
(9) The alternatives to relocation and whether it is feasible and desirable for the other party to relocate also;
(10) The financial impact and logistics of the relocation or its prevention; and
(11) For a temporary order, the amount of time before a final decision can be made at trial.
[
2025 c 166 s 7
;
2019 c 79 s 3
;
2000 c 21 s 14
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.525
Substantially equal residential time.
(1) If the person proposing relocation of a child has substantially equal residential time:
(a) The presumption in RCW 26.09.520
does not apply; and
(b) In determining whether to restrict a parent's right to relocate with a child or in determining a modification of the court order as defined in RCW 26.09.410
based on the proposed relocation, the court shall make a determination in the best interests of the child considering the factors set forth in RCW 26.09.520
.
(2) For the purposes of this section and RCW 26.09.430, "substantially equal residential time" includes arrangements in which forty-five percent or more of the child's residential time is spent with each parent. In determining the percentage, the court must (a) consider only time spent with parents and not any time ordered for nonparents under chapter
26.11
RCW; and (b) base its determination on the amount of time designated in the court order unless: (i) There has been an ongoing pattern of substantial deviation from the residential schedule; (ii) both parents have agreed to the deviation; and (iii) the deviation is not based on circumstances that are beyond either parent's ability to control.
[
2019 c 79 s 1
.]
RCW 26.09.530
Factor not to be considered.
In determining whether to permit or restrain the relocation of the child, the court may not admit evidence on the issue of whether the person seeking to relocate the child will forego his or her own relocation if the child's relocation is not permitted or whether the person opposing relocation will also relocate if the child's relocation is permitted. The court may admit and consider such evidence after it makes the decision to allow or restrain relocation of the child and other parenting, custody, or visitation issues remain before the court, such as what, if any, modifications to the parenting plan are appropriate and who the child will reside with the majority of the time if the court has denied relocation of the child and the person is relocating without the child.
[
2000 c 21 s 15
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.540
Objections by nonparents.
A court may not restrict the right of a parent to relocate the child when the sole objection to the relocation is from a third party, unless that third party is entitled to residential time or visitation under a court order and has served as the primary residential care provider to the child for a substantial period of time during the thirty-six consecutive months preceding the intended relocation.
[
2000 c 21 s 16
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.550
Sanctions.
The court may sanction a party if it finds that a proposal to relocate the child or an objection to an intended relocation or proposed revised residential schedule was made to harass a person, to interfere in bad faith with the relationship between the child and another person entitled to residential time or visitation with the child, or to unnecessarily delay or needlessly increase the cost of litigation.
[
2000 c 21 s 17
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.560
Priority for hearing.
A hearing involving relocations or intended relocations of children shall be accorded priority on the court's motion calendar and trial docket.
[
2000 c 21 s 18
.]
NOTES:
Intent
—
Captions not law
—
2000 c 21:
See notes following RCW 26.09.405
.
RCW 26.09.900
Construction
—
Pending divorce actions.
Notwithstanding the repeals of prior laws enumerated in section 30, chapter 157, Laws of 1973 1st ex. sess., actions for divorce which were properly and validly pending in the superior courts of this state as of the effective date of such repealer (July 15, 1973) shall be governed and may be pursued to conclusion under the provisions of law applicable thereto at the time of commencement of such action and all decrees and orders heretofore or hereafter in all other respects regularly entered in such proceedings are declared valid: PROVIDED, That upon proper cause being shown at any time before final decree, the court may convert such action to an action for dissolution of marriage as provided for in RCW 26.09.901
.
[
1974 ex.s. c 15 s 1
.]
RCW 26.09.901
Conversion of pending action to dissolution proceeding.
Any divorce action which was filed prior to July 15, 1973 and for which a final decree has not been entered on February 11, 1974, may, upon order of the superior court having jurisdiction over such proceeding for good cause shown, be converted to a dissolution proceeding and thereafter be continued under the provisions of this chapter.
[
1974 ex.s. c 15 s 2
.]
RCW 26.09.902
RCW 26.09.900
and
26.09.901
deemed in effect on July 16, 1973.
The provisions of RCW 26.09.900
and
26.09.901
are remedial and procedural and shall be construed to have been in effect as of July 16, 1973.
[
1974 ex.s. c 15 s 3
.]
RCW 26.09.907
Construction
—
Pending actions as of January 1, 1988.
Notwithstanding the repeals of prior laws, actions which were properly and validly pending in the superior courts of this state as of January 1, 1988, shall not be governed by chapter 460, Laws of 1987 but shall be governed by the provisions of law in effect on December 31, 1987.
[
1989 c 375 s 17
;
1987 c 460 s 23
.]
RCW 26.09.909
Decrees entered into prior to January 1, 1988.
(1) Decrees under this chapter involving child custody, visitation, or child support entered in actions commenced prior to January 1, 1988, shall be deemed to be parenting plans for purposes of this chapter.
(2) The enactment of the 1987 revisions to this chapter does not constitute substantially changed circumstances for the purposes of modifying decrees entered under this chapter in actions commenced prior to January 1, 1988, involving child custody, visitation, or child support. Any action to modify any decree involving child custody, visitation, child support, or a parenting plan shall be governed by the provisions of this chapter.
(3) Actions brought for clarification or interpretation of decrees entered under this chapter in actions commenced prior to January 1, 1988, shall be determined under the law in effect immediately prior to January 1, 1988.
[
1990 1st ex.s. c 2 s 16
;
1989 c 375 s 18
;
1987 c 460 s 24
.]
NOTES:
Effective dates
—
Severability
—
1990 1st ex.s. c 2:
See notes following RCW 26.09.100
.
RCW 26.09.910
Short title
—
1987 c 460.
This act shall be known as the parenting act of 1987.
[
1987 c 460 s 57
.]
RCW 26.09.911
Section captions
—
1987 c 460.
Section captions as used in this act do not constitute any part of the law.
[
1987 c 460 s 58
.]
RCW 26.09.912
Effective date
—
1987 c 460.
This act shall take effect on January 1, 1988.
[
1987 c 460 s 59
.]
RCW 26.09.915
Construction
—
Chapter applicable to state registered domestic partnerships
—
2009 c 521.
For the purposes of this chapter, the terms spouse, marriage, marital, husband, wife, widow, widower, next of kin, and family shall be interpreted as applying equally to state registered domestic partnerships or individuals in state registered domestic partnerships as well as to marital relationships and married persons, and references to dissolution of marriage shall apply equally to state registered domestic partnerships that have been terminated, dissolved, or invalidated, to the extent that such interpretation does not conflict with federal law. Where necessary to implement chapter 521, Laws of 2009, gender-specific terms such as husband and wife used in any statute, rule, or other law shall be construed to be gender neutral, and applicable to individuals in state registered domestic partnerships.
[
2009 c 521 s 65
.]
RCW 26.09.916
Rule-making authority
—
2020 c 227.
The department is granted rule-making authority to adopt rules necessary for the implementation of chapter 227, Laws of 2020.
[
2020 c 227 s 14
.]
NOTES:
Findings
—
Intent
—
2020 c 227:
See note following RCW 26.09.320
.