Yes, the OP may not have it or the OP may have different verbiage in hers. Court orders dated after Jan 9 2001 must contain it. But there are exceptions to that if the parents agree to some other kind of verbiage that can replace it or a Judge can change the verbiage.
If the other parent consents they do not have to go to court, but I would advise anyone to get that consent in writing and submit it to your case file in case the other parent loses their memory on consenting.
#3 the first sentence in this section is not in my daughters order, the Judge took it out based on circumstances.
Court papers will need to be filed to change parenting time for sure if the parties can't agree on a new plan. If one party moves and they can't do that current plan, they can't demand the other parent haul the child to the airport or to the other state or pay for a plane ticket to get the child to the other parent or change the current time to blocks of time. What they can do is nicely work with the other parent and work out a new plan. If they won't do that, then tough it's their problem the other parent does not have to do anything that is not in the current order.
I never could get a straight answer on if the moving applied to the NCP or not. Then the NCP in my other daughters case moved, daughter refused to do the plan he was asking, he refused her plan. He then turned around and filed. My daughters lawyer said yes it applies to the NCP however no Judge ever applies it, they had 2 motions he filed to deal with, so she skipped that part. Didn't matter cause he had it right in his motion to modify CS, he said he moved states, so now he has a lower paying job. Judge flipped out cause he moved without my daughters or the courts permission.
That's was about 1 1/2 years ago, but I just sat through 2 other cases(work related), 2 other counties, 2 other Judges and they did just about the same with it as my daughters Judge did.
Here is what I saw as to why they did all flip. That piece is law, that piece or something agreed to must go in court orders. By not following it and asking permission to move, they were in contempt OF THE COURT(capitalized those 3 words cause all 3 Judges shouted them several times). The law states the child has 2 legal addresses, your moving 1 of those legal addresses.
Next all 3 cases were joint legal. In joint legal you must jointly agree to major decisions concerning the child. Moving 1 of the childs residence far away is a major decision. You first have to attempt to make an agreement with the other parent on that decision, if you can't come to one your only option after that is to have the court make it. YOU CAN'T MAKE YOUR OWN DECISION. All 3 of the NCP's in these cases did just that they made their own major decision. That's also contempt.
Technically the NCP is not asking the courts permission for the NCP to move, they are asking the courts permission to move 1 of the childs legal addresses. This is what confuses so many, cause the court can't deny an adult to move if they want to, but then can deny the adult to move the child if it's a split situation. Moving 1 of the legal addresses is moving the child, so you need the other parents permission or the courts.
