Jurisdiction

[crayiii]

we have a venue hearing in Oregon next week.  Is this our chance to convince the Oregon court to not give up it's "home state" status?

[socrateaser]

>we have a venue hearing in Oregon next week.  Is this our
>chance to convince the Oregon court to not give up it's "home
>state" status?

Yes, but it's not that simple. The court can "bifurcate" your divorce, so that custody may be resolved by a WA court, while property and child/spousal support may be resolved in OR. This means you could be stuck in a quagmire of unnecessary extra legal costs and hearings.

I would have to read the pleadings in both courts to have a clue about the fix you're in, however, I would expect that both the WA and OR judges would confer with each other, either before or after your hearing and then come to a decision as to who would take jurisdiction. I think you have an edge at the moment, but I don't read tea leaves, so that's as far as I'm gonna go.

[crayiii]

We had the joint WA and OR juridictional hearing today.

WA said that OR was the home state, had significant connection, and my wife had "dirty hands".

OR said that Oregon would be an inconvieniant forum for my wife and since I had both a OR and a WA attorney, Oregon was declining jurisdiction.

Now I'm broke and have to go pro se in Washington...

[socrateaser]

>We had the joint WA and OR juridictional hearing today.
>
>WA said that OR was the home state, had significant
>connection, and my wife had "dirty hands".
>
>OR said that Oregon would be an inconvieniant forum for my
>wife and since I had both a OR and a WA attorney, Oregon was
>declining jurisdiction.
>
>Now I'm broke and have to go pro se in Washington...

Oh well, don't say I didn't warn ya...

What you describe as having happened is confusing, but I'd have to read both court orders to actually understand what happened. Nevertheless, it appears that the WA judge is not very happy with the mother, so I would try to hang on to your WA attorney and attempt to obtain an emergency temporary custody order, using the WA court finding of unclean hands as the rationale that the mother does not act in the child's best interests, and that she may flee with the child again. And, I would do this IMMEDIATELY.

Going pro se, in my opinion is a big mistake for you at the moment.

[crayiii]

The Oregon judge said that my wife convinced him that she had no money and could not afford to hire an Oregon attorney and travel to the State for hearings.

The judge went on to say that because of her financial hardship and because I already had an attorney in WA that that court could move much faster than Oregon.

Both attorneys want to file appeals but I have told them "no".

[socrateaser]

>The Oregon judge said that my wife convinced him that she had
>no money and could not afford to hire an Oregon attorney and
>travel to the State for hearings.
>
>The judge went on to say that because of her financial
>hardship and because I already had an attorney in WA that that
>court could move much faster than Oregon.
>
>Both attorneys want to file appeals but I have told them
>"no".

I think you may be getting the shaft from your lawyers. The qeustion that you need to ask is "Why didn't he WA court refuse jurisdiction?" It absolutely could have, and Oregon would have been FORCED to accept jurisdiction.

So, while you may wish to believe that the WA judge was on your side, the reality is that he wasn't. Which is why I am suggesting that you give it one more try. If the WA judge actually believed that the mother has unclean hands, then the court should have no trouble giving you an extremely favorable emergency temporary custody order.

So, if you file for an emergency order and the hearing is stalled or you lose your motion, that will be notice to you that you are simply wasting your time and money, and that you should settle and get out of the court system and move on with your life.

Just my opinion, of course...you must make your own decision.