Going to court

[awakenlynn]

The jurisdiction is now currently TX.

Ex recently moved jurisdiction from IL to TX because my husband got out of the military.  (Because my husband and her husband were both on active duty, IL kept a firm hold on the jurisdiction for 13 years).  The current order was made in 2000 with modifications in 2003.  SD is 14 years old and we only have 3 years + one spring break of court ordered visits.

1st issue: ex filed and registered the IL court order for visitation as a foreign order in TX.  No problems there.  But now ex is argueing that there have been a substantial change in circumstance and wants the entire IL order on visitation to be vacated.  If the judge does not agree with vacating the order, then she wants the TX standard order to be put in place with changes she wants.

Under the current order we get every spring break (we pay for transportation), 8 consecutive and uninterrupted weeks in the summer (ex pays for transportation) and alternating Thanksgiving and Christmas breaks (we pay for transportation).

Ex wants it to be every other spring break, 6 weeks in the summer, alternating Thanksgiving and breaking the Christmas break in half.  She wants us to pay all the transportation.

2nd issue: Ex has never moved jurisdiction from IL to TX in regards to child support.  It is a seperate issue that she has never addressed.  She was getting Child support thru the IL SDU, but made them close down the case and opened a case thru the TX child support office.  TX finally admitted that they had no legal standing to issue the child support withholding notice and they did not communicate with the legal state of IL.  They created about $1000 in arrears because they did not keep IL appraised that they were taking child support.  They also are not following the court order that ex registered that stated that the 8 week summer visitation child support is court ordered abated.  TX and ex now owes us $1590.  The only way for IL to accept the $1000 that we have paid thru TX is for a judge to ok and order it to be counted.  IL wants the 2 District attorneys to talk and have jurisdiction to be moved to TX.  TX has pretty strict statutes that can move a child support case from one state to another, but I have been told "they really don't follow them".  Because ex is the one on record as having moved TX, according to the statute is supposed to make ex go to the state we live in and have an interstate case started.

Questions:

1. Will TX abate a foreign order?
2. What consists of a substancial change of circumstance in TX?
3. Can 2 states just decide who gets jurisdiction without going to court or having either party involved?
4. Can TX just "decide" it doesn't want to follow a statute?

[lilywhite]

I have the same deal.  Lived in Illinois.  Moved to Texas.

Questions:

1. Will TX abate a foreign order?

No but it will modify it since it accepted it as a foreign.  If the court feels that it is in the best interest of the child/children that the Texas Standard order be used, then they'll use it.  It's a very thorough and good order, by the way.

2. What consists of a substancial change of circumstance in TX?

That the order no longer is in the children's best interest because they've moved and are older.  That would be a substantial change.

3. Can 2 states just decide who gets jurisdiction without going to court or having either party involved?

From what I understand, jurisdiction is a matter of law, not a matter of which each party wants.  Illinois doesn't have jurisdiction over custody if the children don't live there.  The jurisdiction over custody is whichever state is best able to decide the best interest of the children.  The children live in Texas.  Texas has jurisdiction.  If at least one party still lived in Illinois, it would have jurisdiction over child support.  That's not the case.  Why on earth would you want a state where neither of the parents not the child live to have any jurisdiction anyway.  What a pain for everyone have to travel there to go to court?????

4. Can TX just "decide" it doesn't want to follow a statute?

Don't know what you mean.  

[awakenlynn]

actually, going from the age of 13 to 14 isn't a substantial change in circumstance.  The moving doesn't really make it either, ex moved 5 years ago to TX and only moved the jurisdiction for visitation in 2006 and established it 3 months ago.

The issue isn't really for IL to retain jurisdiction even though that county knows the most about it since they have held the jurisdiction for 13 yrs.

TX child support office has told my husband that even though the state statutes are very defined as to whether the child support jurisdiction moves to the state of the custodial or non-custodial parent when a case is moved as it did in this case.  We do not meet any of the guidelines that says TX can take the child support, but the Child Support Office told my husband that they don't really follow the statute, they just do what they want.

Well, I guess we just wait for court now.
Lynn