Link for opinion: http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06240803rts.pdf
The Supreme Court of Indiana held in the Stewart v. Vulliet, 867 N.E.2d 226 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) more than two years, the mother filed a motion asserting inconvenient forum. The expecting mother filed the divorce and child custody proceedings in Indiana and thereafter moves to Washington State, where she gave birth.
The mother married in Washington, and lived there for nine years, when they relocated to Indiana. The mother filed for dissolution of to the parties’ of marriage in Indiana. At the time, she was pregnant with their only child. When filed the petition she went back to live in Washington State.
In the two years (2004-2005), the state courts of Indiana issued many orders for the child’s custody. The father requested the visitation of his daughter to have the physical custody. That he would receive seven to ten days of visitation every two months. The Father filed a motion to compel discovery, with the issue of an order regarding the child support, and the guidance to the company of preparing the Father’s home study and for a final hearing.
In the two years (2004-2005), the state courts of Indiana issued many orders for the child’s custody. The father requested the visitation of his daughter to have the physical custody. That he would receive seven to ten days of visitation every two months. The Father filed a motion to compel discovery, with the issue of an order regarding the child support, and the guidance to the company of preparing the Father’s home study and for a final hearing.
Even though the Mother’s motion to dismiss for forum inconvenience and Father argues that, the dismissal been barred. With that being said, the fact here is that the child and his custodial parent live in another state does not, as a matter of law, that divest the trial court of jurisdiction. When waived, with the trial of court has the discretion to decline the exercise of jurisdiction on the grounds of forum inconvenience. The UCCJL does provide the court with a subject matter of the jurisdiction over a child custody dispute that may “decline to exercise its jurisdiction any time before making a decree if it finds that it is an inconvenient forum . . . under the circumstances . . . and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum.” Ind. Code Ann. § 31-17-3-7(a) (West 2006).
The outcome of Stewart v. Vulliet, is that the Father’s argument was a dismissal was inappropriate because there was no written stipulations fails on what was what when they filed a divorce.
This is very interesting and informative. Jurisditional issues in divorce, child custody and parental rights and responsibilities are becoming much more germane in a highly mobile society such as ours.
ReplyDelete