question regarding registering out of state court order

[jmoffit]

I am a party to a court ordered visitation order in ohio,the other party claims she had registered the court order in the state she moved to(south carolina) four months ago,i had not received any notice from the court regarding the registration of the order there,should the south carolina courts have notified me in some way?

Another question is since this court order is not being followed,and i have to travel to south carolina to seek enforcement,would she be liable for my attorney fees and associated costs to go there?

thanks in advance

[socrateaser]

>I am a party to a court ordered visitation order in ohio,the
>other party claims she had registered the court order in the
>state she moved to(south carolina) four months ago,i had not
>received any notice from the court regarding the registration
>of the order there,should the south carolina courts have
>notified me in some way?

No. You're not a citizen of SC, so the order is not enforceable against you unless you are within the territorial boundaries of the state. I don't know why the other parent would bother to register the order there, because the only person she can enforce the order against is herself.

>Another question is since this court order is not being
>followed,and i have to travel to south carolina to seek
>enforcement,would she be liable for my attorney fees and
>associated costs to go there?

Well, this changes things somewhat. The fact that the other parent has registered the order in SC, provides you with the ability to enforce it on motion or via law enforcement (assuming that this is permitted in SC). This is actually good for you, because you've saved yourself from having to register the order yourself.

If you prove contempt, then yes to attorney fees, but without knowing exactly what your complaint is, I can't tell if there's a legal theory for recovery of your costs to appear in court.

[jmoffit]

first i thank you for your reply!

The reasons for the previous questions were because in november 2006 in ohio i filed for modification of custody due to mother not allowing visitation,they had been in south carolina for two years at that point,however advice i was given was to file for modification here in ohio,papers were filed and she was served in south carolina,last week she informed me she was not coming to ohio for court ,stating that she had registered the order in south carolina in august,it seems the courts in s.c. would have been required to notify me in some way of the registration of the court order.

thank you!

[socrateaser]

>first i thank you for your reply!
>
>The reasons for the previous questions were because in
>november 2006 in ohio i filed for modification of custody due
>to mother not allowing visitation,they had been in south
>carolina for two years at that point,however advice i was
>given was to file for modification here in ohio,papers were
>filed and she was served in south carolina,last week she
>informed me she was not coming to ohio for court ,stating that
>she had registered the order in south carolina in august,it
>seems the courts in s.c. would have been required to notify me
>in some way of the registration of the court order.

Once a child is a resident of a state for more than 6 months, that state becomes the "home" state of the child, and the courts of that new state can take jurisdiction over future custody issues (but not child support).

However, before the new state court (SC) can exercise jurisdiction, the old state court (OH) must relinquish jurisdiction, basically on grounds that the old state is no longer the appropriate forum for a new custody hearing (usually due to the child being absent from the state for so long that the evidence related to the case will primarily be found in the new state (educational records, social witnesses, etc.)).

So, you were correct in filing for custody changes in OH, and if the other parent fails to show, she could find herself in a touchy spot with the court. However, courts from "old" states, have been known to relinquish jurisdiction, even where the other parent makes no appearance in the action, in the interest of not harming an innocent child by an adverse ruling against the parent, so it could go either way.