Rule 91.4.Post-Judgment Petition to Relocate or Prevent Relocation

Rule 91.4 covers both sides of a move, and it does not treat them the same.

The asymmetry

A petition to relocate a minor child must comply with A.R.S. section 25-408 and Rule 91.3 -- which brings the full parenting modification apparatus: detailed facts, verification or affidavits under section 25-411, the interstate affidavit where the order came from elsewhere, and the heightened service requirement.

A petition to prevent relocation must comply with section 25-408 and Rule 91 only. The general post-judgment framework applies, but not Rule 91.3's additional requirements.

The reason is structural. A parent seeking to move is asking to change the existing parenting arrangement, so the modification requirements attach. A parent objecting is asking the court to preserve the arrangement already in place, and it would be odd to require them to plead a modification they do not want.

Disclosure, on both sides

The same five categories apply either way: protective orders and their petitions -- here measured from the last Rule 78 judgment; treatment providers and periods for psychiatric or psychological issues, anger management, substance abuse or domestic violence; criminal charges and convictions with date, description, location and documentation; Department of Child Safety investigations; and relevant documents regarding any relevant statutory factor, with the rule pointing specifically at the factors in A.R.S. section 25-408(I).

That last cross-reference is the practical one. Section 25-408(I) lists what a court weighs on a relocation request, and the rule makes documents bearing on those factors part of the mandatory disclosure rather than something to be sought later by discovery.