Welcome to SPARC Forums. Please login or sign up.

Jul 17, 2024, 08:31:05 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Interstate Visitation Questions

Started by gabes_mom, Sep 24, 2007, 09:05:25 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

olanna

Same thing here...SC wouldn't release it and the child had lived most of his life with me CA.  The child had equal connections to relatives in both states, so that one didn't fit in..and most of the child's education, etc was in CA.

Davy


Please Mist you are sadly mistaken.  You may be citing a mis-guided social policy while the well accepted standard in this country is as follows :

The UCCJA and PKPA contains language as such :

a court of this State has jurisdiction to make an initial child-custody determination only if:

(1) this State is the home State of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was the home State of the child within six months before the commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from this State but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this State;

... and continuing conditions

---The 6 month rule attorneys talk about ($$$) and is heavily basterized on this site is only one of many issues governing jurisdiction but it is very difficult to LEGALLY defeat the continuing and exclusiive home state jurisdiction as long as a left-behind parent continues to reside in the home state. Home state jurisdiction is normally reqlinqueshed if no parties continue to reside in the state or no party objects.


Oh and about forum shopping.   Forum shopping normally occurs in different judical venues within the same state.  As an example, a four year TX resident can file in one IL venue after one day presence then relocate to a 2nd judicial venue 200 miles away on day 5.

The children and the left-behind TX parent had absolutely zero connection to either venue and the IL file-happy TX parent had not had a significant connection to the 2nd venue for 15 years and never to the first venue.  

Mist I could continue just to point out how deplorable interstate proceedings become.  I'm politely asking you to stop expounding on issues you have no explosure or knowledge. Over a great many years many children have suffered greatly and many parents have exhausted themselves trying to overcome the damage caused by these mis-guided social policies.  

MixedBag

Didn't dad still live in SC???

And what state granted the inital divorce??

Did you ever ask to have it moved to your state?

Did you ever modify the order?

MixedBag

Didn't Dad still live in CA?

And what state granted the initial divorce?

Did you ever ask to have it moved to your state?

Did you ever modify the original order?

Kitty C.

That's a confusing question in our case...........

Support was temporarily ordered in IA, BEFORE a permanent custody order was established in CA.  CA retained jurisdiction because at the time the order was written, DS had lived the majority of his life there (3 in CA, 1 in IA).  When I tried to make the support order in IA permanent (a few years after the perm. custody order was made), IA said that CA had jurisdiction since they had the custody order and Dad still lived there.  So the support order in IA was dismissed!  Legally, DS's dad didn't have to pay a dime after that, but he continued paying the same amount, all the way up to his death in 2001.

He paid $250 a month for 8 years............if I had had the money, and the vindictiveness, I could have pushed for a support order in CA and forced him to pay 2 to 3 times that amount.  But we were getting along so well for DS's sake that I didn't want to rock the boat and it would have only been greedy of me to try that anyway.
Handle every stressful situation like a dog........if you can't play with it or eat it, pee on it and walk away.......

MixedBag

See -- my personal humble interpretation and understanding is that IF one parent still lives in the original state, jurisdiction doesn't follow the child until BOTH parents move away.

Mist and I respectfully disagree -- and actually so does the judge who has jurisdiction over my case.  So I said in court twice that I would not file to have jurisdiction moved.  No problem.


You're another example of how I think it works.



Davy


... for DS's sake ... is the most important words in your post.  Very honorable and valuable functioning.

 It is also important that you mentioned the father continued to pay CS
without force.  I submit that DS's Dad did so because he loved DS .. AND because he TRUSTED you to use the money for DS.   Personally, I have great respect for both of DS's parents.

As to the jurisdictional issues, it appears that your case may be one concerning convenient forum while case historys mostly dwell on disenfanchising the other parent.  IMHO, it is one of the MOST HUMANLY DEMEANING thing a person(s) and society can do to children and a parent.  (Note; in my case the other parent was not the engineer but sadly somehow allowed/tolerated it ).  

olanna

*Didn't dad still live in SC???*

Yes. But all the children moved with me to CA.

*And what state granted the inital divorce??*

SC

*Did you ever ask to have it moved to your state?*

Yes but ex refused to allow that to do be done.

*Did you ever modify the order?*

Many times.  

MixedBag

Another example then of how I feel the law works.

gabes_mom

Davy
>
>IMHO, Gabesmom (and Dad) are doing what they can (knowing all
>the players) under the circumstances ... at very least they're
>seeking advise and support.  She should not have to defend her
>inquiry.
>
>  
I just wanted to thank you for what you had to say.