Hernandez v. Jenkins, 122 So. 3d 524

M.H. is a minor whose parents Misty Hernandez (mother) and Brandon Jenkins (father) are involved in a custody dispute; they were never married but paternity was acknowledged.
In 2004 the parties entered a stipulated judgment designating Hernandez as domiciliary parent with Jenkins having custody every other weekend and holidays; Hernandez was to receive child support and share of premiums/expenses.
In 2011 Hernandez sought to relocate M.H. to Enterprise, Alabama, seeking to live with her fiancé/husband Gary Ray and to pursue better employment opportunities.
Hernandez was laid off in Louisiana and had found a job in Alabama; she claimed relocation would improve circumstances for both herself and M.H.
Jenkins opposed relocation, asserting it would negatively affect M.H.’s relationship with him and his extended Louisiana family; he also owed past due support.
The family court denied Hernandez’s relocation request, finding negative impacts on the father-child relationship, and the matter was appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether relocation was in good faith and in the child’s best interest	Hernandez: relocation is in good faith and benefits the child financially and emotionally	Jenkins: relocation harms father-child relationships and disrupts established custody	Relocation approved; relocation would benefit child and not significantly harm relationships
Whether the court properly weighed the La. R.S. 9:355.12 factors	Hernandez: court failed to properly apply the factors, especially impact on child	Jenkins: court correctly weighed factors against relocation	Abused discretion for misweighing factors and prioritizing non-child-centered impacts
Whether the father's past-due support affected the decision	Hernandez: arrears and financial delinquency weighed in favor of relocation	Jenkins: financial obligations should not compel denial	Abuse acknowledged; arrears support relocation decision in light of overall benefit to child
Whether the relocation would significantly disrupt the child’s relationship with Louisiana relatives	Hernandez: disruption minimal; custody plan maintained; child’s ties preserved	Jenkins: relocation would reduce contact with relatives	Relocation would not significantly disrupt non-relocating relatives; court erred in weighing impact on child

Curole v. Curole, 828 So.2d 1094 (La. 2002) (guides best-interest balancing in relocation cases)
Gathen v. Gathen, 66 So.3d 1 (La. 2011) (historical weight of support obligations in relocation analysis)
Gray v. Gray, 65 So.3d 1247 (La. 2011) (clarifies no preferential weighting of any single factor)