To: Silverplum

[Clod]

Really, really -- Colorado had jurisdiction because conception was there. BELIEVE me, most other States would have been much "kinder."

Colorado 13-1-124. Jurisdiction of courts.
Statute text
(1) Engaging in any act enumerated in this section by any person, whether or not a resident of the state of Colorado, either in person or by an agent, submits such person and, if a natural person, such person's personal representative to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state concerning any cause of action arising from:

(f) The engaging of sexual intercourse in this state as to an action brought under article 4 or article 6 of title 19, C.R.S., with respect to a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse, as set forth in verified petition;

Anyway, sorry -- didn't mean to offer info. that was useless -- I justly honestly thought this should be considered.

 

[moburkes]

Why did you start a new post about this?

 

[Silverplum]

If you plan to give me a reference to make your point, why not include a link so that I don't have to go searching??
http://198.187.128.12/colorado/lpext.dll/Infobase4/1ef93/1efe4/1efe6/1f115?f=templates&fn=fs-main-doc.htm&q=Colorado 13-1-124&x=Advanced&2.0#LPHit1

It has everything to do with CONDUCTING BUSINESS in Colorado, and it does include family/kid issues -- "if one of the parties of the marriage continues without interruption to be domiciled within the state."

Further, it states this:
The engaging of sexual intercourse in this state as to an action brought under article 4 or article 6 of title 19, C.R.S., with respect to a child who may have been conceived by that act of intercourse, as set forth in verified petition."
Uh, how exactly does one bring an action in a state in which they do not live???

"A spouse's affidavit that the spouse has resided and continues to reside in Colorado is sufficient for a Colorado court to exercise long arm jurisdiction over the husband under subsection (1)(e). In re Akins, 932 P.2d 863 (Colo. App. 1997)."
Note the INHERENT DISCRIMINATION in the very wording of the statute -- "over the husband," as if WIVES never pull this crap.
Nonetheless, it has to do with one spouse, at least, residing in CO.