Parenting of A.L.W.

Summary

The Court affirmed the denial of Arrington’s request to relocate with the child to Idaho and the adoption of a parenting plan placing the child primarily with Father if the move occurred. It held that the order did not violate Arrington’s right to travel because it did not prevent her from relocating, but instead determined that relocating the child was contrary to the child’s best interests. The Court also concluded that the District Court’s findings adequately supported its application of the statutory parenting-plan factors and that Arrington’s remaining procedural challenges were either unpreserved or lacked merit.