The appeals court agreed with the trial court that the father met the first prong of the Yannas test because there was a "real advantage" to him moving to Florida, namely decreased expenses and family support. In addition, the request to move did not appear to be motivated by a desire to deprive the mother of time with the child.
The second part of the Yannas test requires the court to determine if the move is in the "best interest of the child" taking into account numerous factors:
- "whether the quality of the [child's] li[fe] will be improved, including any improvement that 'may flow from an improvement in the quality of the custodial parent's life';"
- "any possible 'adverse effect of the elimination or curtailment of the [child's] association with the noncustodial parent';"
- "the extent to which moving or not moving will affect the [child's] emotional, physical, or developmental needs;"
- "the interests of both parents;" and
- "the possibility of an alternative visitation schedule for the noncustodial parent."
"While the mother's 'near perfect' adherence to the parenting schedule during the five months in which the trial was pending is commendable, it does not erase the substantial time that she already missed."