Opinion ID: 2090464
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: legitimate reasons for relocation

Text: Upon our de novo review of the record, we conclude that the mother met the threshold requirement of proving a legitimate reason for moving. We have recognized that job-related changes are legitimate reasons for moving where there is a `reasonable expectation of improvement in the career or occupation of the custodial parent,' Farnsworth, 257 Neb. at 252, 597 N.W.2d at 600, quoting Gerber v. Gerber, 225 Neb. 611, 407 N.W.2d 497 (1987), and where the custodial parent's new job included increased potential for salary advancement, Farnsworth, supra ; Jafari v. Jafari, 204 Neb. 622, 284 N.W.2d 554 (1979). The mother testified that at the time she accepted the offer from Bankers Life and Casualty in Pittsburgh, she expected her income would become competitive with her past employment with Mutual of Omaha and greater than what it subsequently proved to be. By the time of the hearing on the permanent removal, the mother had changed employment to Aetna, and she testified that her current job at Aetna offered greater potential for salary advancement than the job she had held at Mutual of Omaha. In addition, the mother testified her job at Aetna required less overtime than her job at Mutual of Omaha, allowing her to spend more time with the children. Although at the time of trial the mother's job in Pittsburgh did not pay as well than the job she had held in Omaha, there was sufficient evidence for the district court to conclude that the mother had a reasonable expectation for improvement in her career. Furthermore, the mother testified that a significant additional reason for the move was to be closer to her extended family. Although career advancement and remarriage have commonly been found to be legitimate reasons for a move in removal cases, they do not compose the exclusive list of legitimate reasons. We recently concluded that a custodial parent's firm offer of employment with a flexible schedule in close proximity to [the custodial parent's] extended family constitutes a legitimate reason in a removal case. Kalkowski v. Kalkowski, 258 Neb. 1035, 1046, 607 N.W.2d 517, 527-27 (2000). In Kalkowski, our review of the record indicated that the custodial mother's principal reasons for wishing to relocate to Canada [were] her desire to be near her extended family and her plan to pursue educational and employment opportunities there. 258 Neb. at 1045-46, 607 N.W.2d at 527-27. We found her reasons legitimate despite the fact that she did not investigate educational opportunities in Nebraska and conducted only a limited investigation of employment opportunities in this state. Id. at 1046, 607 N.W.2d at 526-27. The record in the instant case shows sufficient evidence for the district court to conclude that the mother's reasons for moving were legitimate. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in crediting the mother's testimony and in finding that she had proved a legitimate reason to move.