Jurisdiction?

[MarieB]

Original Order in State A
NCP continuously resided in State A

Child lived in State B for 5 Years
Moved to State C for 1.5 Years
Moved to State D for 4 Months
Moved to State E for 1 Month
Moved to State F - now been there for 1 Week

Need to file Modification of Parenting Time.

According to UCCJA who has jurisdiction?

Thanks

[socrateaser]

>Original Order in State A
>NCP continuously resided in State A
>
>Child lived in State B for 5 Years
>Moved to State C for 1.5 Years
>Moved to State D for 4 Months
>Moved to State E for 1 Month
>Moved to State F - now been there for 1 Week
>
>Need to file Modification of Parenting Time.
>
>According to UCCJA who has jurisdiction?

First issue is that you may or may not be aware that there are two different uniform acts: the UCCJA and the UCCJEA. Most states have adopted the newer UCCJEA, but not all have. So, you ask above for me to determine jurisdiction under the older act, and I wonder if this is really what you want. I'm guessing that it probably is not what you want and that your reference to the act is a typo.

Without doing an excrutiatingly painful analysis, and also actually reading the enactments of the UCCJEA in state A and F, it's not really possible to give accurate advice (mainly, because states gernerally refuse to adopt these so called "uniform" acts without making changes that render them not very uniform). However, my advice is that if you really want to stop the madness, that you register your existing order in state F, and then file a motion to modify in state F, on grounds that you are willing to submit to state F jurisdiction, so as to place all of the parties within the same forum, and simultaneously ask that the state F court communicate with the state A court and request that it relinquish its jurisdictional claims.

This is actually backwards from what the UCCJEA would probably require, i.e., to file in state A first and have it relinquish jurisdiction, and then file in state F. But, the problem is that if you do this, there's a very good probablility that the child will not be in State F, when you go to file for the mod, and as a consequence, the other parent will be able to forever evade a modification by continuously moving from state to state. And, that is the rationale that I would provide the court.

The other reason why I advocate the state F approach is that state F has jurisdiction to enter an emergency order on grounds of threats or actual abuse to the child, and you could argue that the moves are abusive and thereby obtain an emergency order in state F, which would prevent the other parent from picking up and leaving until you get your modification done. Whereas, if you file in state A, even if you get a modification, you will eventually have to register it in the state where the child is then located in order to enforce it against the other parent.

So, you may as well, just register the order there first, and then file a motion to modify and thereby consent to jurisdiction therein, which will almost certainly cause the state A court, if asked to say, "If you all want to litigate in state F, then great, I can go back to sleep here in state A!"

Pretty convoluted, but I think state F (or wherever the other parent has the child, is where you want to be).

[MarieB]

Thank-you very much for the advice.

Short update and question.

Got a phone call last night.
All parties may actually agree on the new visitation schedule. Miracles never cease to amaze me.

Should we just put the visitation schedule on the court form for Modification of Parenting Time and both sign and file it in the original state (State A)?

And if so, does anything be included in the order that requests that State A keep jurisdiction?

[socrateaser]

>Should we just put the visitation schedule on the court form
>for Modification of Parenting Time and both sign and file it
>in the original state (State A)?

If the other parent is willing to agree to enter a stipulated order, then you definitely want to use state A, because there will be no question asked about jurisdiction. In fact, you don't even need to tell the court where the child is residing, because the court will not ordinarly disagree with a parenting schedule already agreed to by the parents, unless there's something unlawful expressly stated in the document, or the agreement is so overwhelmingly favorable to one parent over the other that the court may wonder if the impaired parent is not being subjected to some sort of undue influence by the advantaged parent.

>And if so, does anything be included in the order that
>requests that State A keep jurisdiction?

No, technically State A retains jurisdiction until the State A court expressly relinquishes it on grounds of forum inconveniens (inconvenient forum).