Most relocation fights in Collin County are not about a new order — they are about an order that already exists and no longer fits somebody’s life. That is a different problem, with a different standard of proof.
Almost every Texas custody order contains a geographic restriction — a clause fixing the area where the child’s primary residence may be established. Before you plan a move, or react to one, find that clause and read the exact words. Parents routinely misremember what their own order says.
The difference between common phrasings is not cosmetic. “Collin County” is a far tighter boundary than “Collin County and contiguous counties,” which pulls in Dallas, Denton, Grayson, Rockwall and Hunt. A restriction tied to a named school district can be tighter than either. Some orders restrict the child’s residence only while the other parent continues to reside within a stated area — meaning the restriction can lift on its own if that parent moves away first.
Note also what your order does not say. A restriction on the child’s primary residence does not restrict where you may live. A parent is free to move anywhere; what is constrained is where the child’s home may be established and who holds the exclusive right to determine it.
This is an enforcement problem, not a modification problem, and the distinction changes everything about how you respond. Chapter 157 of the Texas Family Code governs enforcement of existing orders. A parent who relocates a child outside a geographic restriction without a court order or written agreement is violating a court order, and the remedies available include contempt, an order compelling the child’s return, make-up possession time, and attorney’s fees.
Speed is not a formality here. Courts weigh the disruption of moving a child a second time, so every week a child spends enrolled in a new school in a new town strengthens the position of the parent who moved. Acquiescence is the other risk — if you knew about the move and said nothing for months, expect to be asked why.
There are exactly two lawful routes: written agreement with the other parent, modified into a court order, or a court order lifting or expanding the restriction. There is no informal third option, and no amount of reasonableness in your circumstances substitutes for one of the two.
A modification of conservatorship or possession is governed by Texas Family Code §156.101. You must generally show a material and substantial change in circumstances of a child or a party since the order was rendered, and that the modification is in the child’s best interest. A job offer is a change; whether it is material and substantial is a question the court decides on the facts.
Practical reality worth hearing plainly: courts are considerably more receptive to a relocation request that comes with a concrete, generous plan for preserving the other parent’s relationship than to one that treats the other parent’s time as an obstacle. Arrive with the plan already built.
Best interest is the primary consideration in any decision about a child, under Texas Family Code §153.002. Courts apply the factors from Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. 1976), and in a relocation case a handful of them carry most of the weight.
If the restriction is lifted, your possession schedule almost certainly has to be rebuilt. Texas Family Code §153.313 sets out the standard terms for parents who reside more than 100 miles apart: the possessory conservator may elect either one weekend per month of his or her choosing or the regular first, third and fifth weekends, and receives an extended summer period of up to 42 days along with every spring break.
Those are floors, not ceilings. Long-distance orders that work in practice tend to add the specifics that the code leaves open — who books the flights, who absorbs the cost when fares rise, what happens when a flight is cancelled, how video contact is scheduled so it is neither ignored nor weaponised, and which parent holds the passport. Vagueness in a long-distance order is expensive later.
Read it carefully with a lawyer before you rely on that. Some orders restrict residence indirectly through the possession schedule or through a right of first refusal that becomes impossible at distance. If the order truly is silent, you have more freedom — but a move that guts the other parent’s time invites a modification suit you may lose.
No. An agreement changes nothing until it is made into a court order. Texts have been read back to parents in court to show they knew the restriction existed and moved anyway. Get agreements reduced to an agreed order.
Texas has specific provisions for servicemembers, including temporary orders during deployment and the ability to designate a person to exercise possession. Bring your orders to the consultation; the analysis is genuinely different.
No. A child 12 or older may tell the judge his or her preference in chambers under Texas Family Code §153.009, and judges listen carefully, but preference is one factor among many and does not control the outcome.
Temporary orders can often be heard within weeks, and a temporary order restraining a move — or permitting one — frequently shapes the final result. This is precisely why delay is costly.
Whether you need permission to move or need to stop a move that is already underway, the first two weeks matter more than the next two months. Lisa G. Garza handles post-decree relocation cases throughout Collin County.