Child Relocation Lawyer in Reno

30 Years in Nevada Family Courts, Ready to Represent Your Side

Moving with a child when a custody order is in place isn’t simply a personal decision. It’s a legal process governed by specific Nevada statutes, and the outcome of a relocation petition depends heavily on how that case is built and presented. At Kelli Anne Viloria, we bring 30 years of family law experience and a career grounded in Washoe County courtrooms to every relocation matter we handle. From her start at the Washoe County District Attorney’s office, Kelli Anne Viloria developed the courtroom foundation that now serves families navigating some of the most consequential custody decisions they’ll ever face.

Our practice is built on confidence, compassion, and conviction. Whether you’re a parent who needs to move and wants court approval, or a parent who has just received notice that the other party plans to relocate with your child, we’re prepared to represent your position effectively.

If a relocation is on the horizon for your family, don’t wait to get legal guidance. Contact Kelli Anne Viloria at (775) 476-5642 to schedule a consultation and discuss your options before circumstances force a decision.

Nevada’s Consent Requirements Before Any Move

Nevada law draws a clear line between parents with primary physical custody and those sharing joint physical custody, and the required steps differ depending on which arrangement applies to your case.

Under NRS 125C.006, a parent with primary physical custody must first seek the other parent’s written consent before relocating. If that consent is refused, the moving parent must petition the court for permission. For parents sharing joint physical custody, NRS 125C.0065 sets a different threshold: written consent is still required, but if the other parent refuses, the relocating parent must petition the court for primary physical custody as a condition of being permitted to move.

Relocation under Nevada law isn’t limited to moves out of state. A move within Nevada can also trigger these requirements if it would substantially impair the other parent’s ability to maintain a meaningful relationship with the child. Courts look at how the proposed move would realistically affect parenting time, not just the distance involved.

What the Court Weighs Under NRS 125C.007

A parent petitioning to relocate carries the burden of proof on three distinct elements. The court evaluates each before granting or denying permission to move.

• Good-faith reason: The move must be motivated by a sensible reason not intended to cut the other parent out of the child’s life. Employment opportunities, family support, and educational access are among the types of reasons courts examine.
• Best interest of the child: The relocation must serve the child’s best interest, not just the relocating parent’s convenience or preference.
• Actual advantage: Both the child and the relocating parent must stand to gain a real, concrete benefit from the move, not a speculative or marginal one.

The court holds a hearing where both parents can present evidence, and how that evidence is framed matters considerably. We build a presentation that speaks directly to each statutory element the court is required to assess.

The Risks of Moving Without Permission

Relocating without written consent or court authorization is a serious mistake with lasting legal consequences. Under NRS 125C.0075, a parent who moves in violation of NRS 200.359 faces a court that won’t consider any post-relocation facts about the child’s welfare when ruling on the matter. The unauthorized move can’t be used to argue that the child has since adjusted or thrived.

The financial consequences can be significant as well. A non-relocating parent forced to file an action in response to an unlawful relocation is entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and costs from the parent who moved without authorization. The reverse also applies: a court may award attorney’s fees and costs to a relocating parent if the other parent refused consent without reasonable grounds or did so to harass.

Representing Both Sides of a Relocation Dispute

We represent parents seeking court permission to relocate with a child and parents opposing a proposed move. These aren’t mirror-image cases. Each side requires a distinct evidentiary and legal strategy, and we approach both with the same thoroughness.

Kelli Anne Viloria also represents the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) of Nevada, an organization that advocates for abused and neglected children. That work keeps our understanding of the best-interest standard grounded in something beyond courtroom theory.

We tailor our approach to each client’s specific circumstances and emphasize cost-effective representation throughout. Many of our former clients become advocates for our services, a reflection of the relationships we build over the course of a case.