MaxinesMom
Junior Member
What is the name of your state?VA
Here's what I found under the Virginia Code of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act:
§ 20-146.12. Initial child custody jurisdiction.
A. Except as otherwise provided in § 20-146.15, a court of this Commonwealth has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if:
1. This Commonwealth 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 Commonwealth but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this Commonwealth;
2. A court of another state does not have jurisdiction under subdivision 1, or a court of the home state of the child has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this Commonwealth is the more appropriate forum under § 20-146.18 or § 20-146.19, and (i) the child and the child's parents, or the child and at least one parent or a person acting as a parent, have a significant connection with this Commonwealth other than mere physical presence and (ii) substantial evidence is available in this Commonwealth concerning the child's care, protection, training, and personal relationships;
3. All courts having jurisdiction under subdivision 1 or 2 have declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a court of this Commonwealth is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child under § 20-146.18 or § 20-146.19; or
4. No court of any other state would have jurisdiction under the criteria specified in subdivision 1, 2, or 3.
B. Subsection A is the exclusive jurisdictional basis for making a child custody determination by a court of this Commonwealth.
C. Physical presence of, or personal jurisdiction over, a party or a child is not necessary or sufficient to make a child custody determination (this right here alone states that VA could make the decision, but the child doesn't have to be physically present in the state, nor does it matter that one of the parent's is still in the state!)
And then it states:
20-146.18. Inconvenient forum.
A. A court of this Commonwealth that has jurisdiction under this act to make a child custody determination may decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time if it determines that it is an inconvenient forum under the circumstances and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum. The issue of inconvenient forum may be raised upon the motion of a party, the court's own motion, or request of another court.
B. Before determining whether it is an inconvenient forum, a court of this Commonwealth shall consider whether it is appropriate for a court of another state to exercise jurisdiction. For this purpose, the court shall allow the parties to present evidence and shall consider all relevant factors, including:
1. Whether domestic violence has occurred and is likely to continue in the future and which state could best protect the parties and the child;
2. The length of time the child has resided outside this Commonwealth;
3. The distance between the court in this Commonwealth and the court in the state that would assume jurisdiction;
4. The relative financial circumstances of the parties;
5. Any agreement of the parties as to which state should assume jurisdiction;
6. The nature and location of the evidence required to resolve the pending litigation, including testimony of the child;
7. The ability of the court of each state to decide the issue expeditiously and the procedures necessary to present the evidence; and
8. The familiarity of the court of each state with the facts and issues in the pending litigation.
C. If a court of this Commonwealth determines that it is an inconvenient forum and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum, it shall stay the proceedings upon condition that a child custody proceeding be promptly commenced in another designated state and may impose any other condition the court considers just and proper.
D. A court of this Commonwealth may decline to exercise its jurisdiction under this act if a child custody determination is incidental to an action for divorce or another proceeding while still retaining jurisdiction over the divorce or other proceeding. (We haven't filed for divorce yet, but it's coming up pretty fast for that time!)
Just interpreting those things, and considering I have proof of domestic violance against my son and I by my ex, these two sections tell me I can motion to leave the state and have another state take over juridiction, for the safety of my children and I, at least that's the way I understand it. This all tells me that if Ohio wants to assume the role of making the child custody determination, since one has not been determined yet, that Ohio can request, to handle the case, of course VA could show reason for a no answer, but knowing the way the judges are in this area, they don't want to waste time on anything they don't have to. I'm sure there are statues just like this for other states as well! I would suggest that others look up their state code for the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (do a search for YOURSTATENAMEHERE Code for the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act), after all, from what I'm reading for just VA alone, there are ways of getting around the jurisdiction part without breaking any laws!
In the Virginia Code, it also states how the states will handle modifying orders, enforcing orders, etc, so I'm sure other states will have that listed as well. Hope this points someone in the right direction, after all, I wouldn't think that you would be stuck in a state you don't want to be in anymore just because of one parent who still lives there, and that you would be bound to filing in just that states courts, because of one parent still living there. The Uniform Act was put into place to try and make some common ground for the states to follow, and so it would be easier for other states to enforce, modify, etc, what another state has put into place. But of course, nothing is set in stone, and the above code references makes me think that the home state of the chld CAN be changed, if the right conditions are met and the courts in each state agree on who should have jurisdiction, etc.
Here's what I found under the Virginia Code of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act:
§ 20-146.12. Initial child custody jurisdiction.
A. Except as otherwise provided in § 20-146.15, a court of this Commonwealth has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if:
1. This Commonwealth 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 Commonwealth but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this Commonwealth;
2. A court of another state does not have jurisdiction under subdivision 1, or a court of the home state of the child has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this Commonwealth is the more appropriate forum under § 20-146.18 or § 20-146.19, and (i) the child and the child's parents, or the child and at least one parent or a person acting as a parent, have a significant connection with this Commonwealth other than mere physical presence and (ii) substantial evidence is available in this Commonwealth concerning the child's care, protection, training, and personal relationships;
3. All courts having jurisdiction under subdivision 1 or 2 have declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a court of this Commonwealth is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child under § 20-146.18 or § 20-146.19; or
4. No court of any other state would have jurisdiction under the criteria specified in subdivision 1, 2, or 3.
B. Subsection A is the exclusive jurisdictional basis for making a child custody determination by a court of this Commonwealth.
C. Physical presence of, or personal jurisdiction over, a party or a child is not necessary or sufficient to make a child custody determination (this right here alone states that VA could make the decision, but the child doesn't have to be physically present in the state, nor does it matter that one of the parent's is still in the state!)
And then it states:
20-146.18. Inconvenient forum.
A. A court of this Commonwealth that has jurisdiction under this act to make a child custody determination may decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time if it determines that it is an inconvenient forum under the circumstances and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum. The issue of inconvenient forum may be raised upon the motion of a party, the court's own motion, or request of another court.
B. Before determining whether it is an inconvenient forum, a court of this Commonwealth shall consider whether it is appropriate for a court of another state to exercise jurisdiction. For this purpose, the court shall allow the parties to present evidence and shall consider all relevant factors, including:
1. Whether domestic violence has occurred and is likely to continue in the future and which state could best protect the parties and the child;
2. The length of time the child has resided outside this Commonwealth;
3. The distance between the court in this Commonwealth and the court in the state that would assume jurisdiction;
4. The relative financial circumstances of the parties;
5. Any agreement of the parties as to which state should assume jurisdiction;
6. The nature and location of the evidence required to resolve the pending litigation, including testimony of the child;
7. The ability of the court of each state to decide the issue expeditiously and the procedures necessary to present the evidence; and
8. The familiarity of the court of each state with the facts and issues in the pending litigation.
C. If a court of this Commonwealth determines that it is an inconvenient forum and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum, it shall stay the proceedings upon condition that a child custody proceeding be promptly commenced in another designated state and may impose any other condition the court considers just and proper.
D. A court of this Commonwealth may decline to exercise its jurisdiction under this act if a child custody determination is incidental to an action for divorce or another proceeding while still retaining jurisdiction over the divorce or other proceeding. (We haven't filed for divorce yet, but it's coming up pretty fast for that time!)
Just interpreting those things, and considering I have proof of domestic violance against my son and I by my ex, these two sections tell me I can motion to leave the state and have another state take over juridiction, for the safety of my children and I, at least that's the way I understand it. This all tells me that if Ohio wants to assume the role of making the child custody determination, since one has not been determined yet, that Ohio can request, to handle the case, of course VA could show reason for a no answer, but knowing the way the judges are in this area, they don't want to waste time on anything they don't have to. I'm sure there are statues just like this for other states as well! I would suggest that others look up their state code for the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (do a search for YOURSTATENAMEHERE Code for the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act), after all, from what I'm reading for just VA alone, there are ways of getting around the jurisdiction part without breaking any laws!
In the Virginia Code, it also states how the states will handle modifying orders, enforcing orders, etc, so I'm sure other states will have that listed as well. Hope this points someone in the right direction, after all, I wouldn't think that you would be stuck in a state you don't want to be in anymore just because of one parent who still lives there, and that you would be bound to filing in just that states courts, because of one parent still living there. The Uniform Act was put into place to try and make some common ground for the states to follow, and so it would be easier for other states to enforce, modify, etc, what another state has put into place. But of course, nothing is set in stone, and the above code references makes me think that the home state of the chld CAN be changed, if the right conditions are met and the courts in each state agree on who should have jurisdiction, etc.