Divorce Lawyers New York - Recent Family Law Decisons (5)
Recent Family Law Decisons (5)
Jurisdiction Assumed
The best interests of the child were served, and the requirements of this Act were satisfied, by permitting mother to proceed with her motion in the Illinois circuit court. In re Kitchen.
It was in the best interest of the minor that Illinois assume jurisdiction where the record showed that the minor spent his entire life and had all of his schooling in Illinois prior to the divorce proceeding, that most of his school records were in Illinois as were his brother, sister, grandmother, and an aunt and uncle who lived with the family for a number of years, and not only were potential witnesses concerning the minor’s education, personal relationships, and well-being in Illinois, but respondent also lived and worked in the state and had done so since the minor’s birth. In re Levy.
Jurisdiction Not Assumed
Although children had connections with both Illinois and Virginia, their best interests indicated that Virginia was the proper forum to contest modification of custody since all prior court proceedings had occurred there, including a subsequent award of custody to the father. Carlston v. Robertson.
The trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction under subdivision (a)(2), where, at the time the mother filed her petition in Illinois, child had returned to live with her father in accordance with the California judgment and the written agreement of the parents. Richardson v. Richardson
It was not in the best interest of the children that Illinois retain jurisdiction over the custody determination where the minor children had spent nearly their entire lives in California and have had all of their schooling in California prior to the divorce proceeding. In re Miche.
Discretion of Court In General
This Act permits some discretion in the trial court’s determination of its jurisdiction to ensure that litigation takes place in the forum where the ties between the state and the child and his family are the closest. In re Slate.
Inconvenient Forum Declining Jurisdiction
Even where the requirements of this section are met and the court has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination, it may decline to exercise it if it finds that court to be an inconvenient forum for the determination under the circumstances of the case, and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum.
