Thanks, Soc.
One point of clarification:
1. BM wants to keep the order in CA, so unless the BM submits to jurisdiction in Utah, it stays in California? Or does the wording in the Utah stipulation create a situation so that the jurisdiction is completely up to the BF--he could contest the modification in CA, and bring it to Utah?
Thanks!
One point of clarification:
1. BM wants to keep the order in CA, so unless the BM submits to jurisdiction in Utah, it stays in California? Or does the wording in the Utah stipulation create a situation so that the jurisdiction is completely up to the BF--he could contest the modification in CA, and bring it to Utah?
Thanks!