Family Law Service Learning Case Summaries - Summer Term 2015 - Matt Mallard

Family Law Service Learning Case Summaries - Summer Term 2015 

Matt Mallard                       LA 265 Summer 2015                          Unit 7

Student Name: Matthew Mallard

Link for opinion:http://www.cobar.org/opinions/opinion.cfm?opinionid=9731&courtid=1

Title: Colorado: Appeals Court Holds that Child has No “Home State” Under the Uniform Child-Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act

The Colorado Court of Appeals held in In re B.C.B., 2015 COA 42 (CO. Ct. App. 2015) that the child in question had no home state for the purposes of determining proper jurisdiction under UCCJEA, and that the child had a more significant connection to Massachusetts than Colorado for the purposes of determining jurisdiction in custody dispute.

Parties to the lawsuit were never married, but parented a child (BCB) in Idaho, but soon moved to the state of Colorado following the child’s birth. In August 2013, mother and BCB went to Massachusetts for extended visit with mother’s family. Mother testified at previous hearing that she had purchased round trip tickets and intended to return if she and father could work out the difficulties in their relationship, but while still in Massachusetts ultimately decided the relationship was over and not to return to Colorado with BCB.

Father, upon learning that mother and child would not be returning, petitioned Colorado district court for allocation of parental responsibilities. Mother responded, contesting the Colorado court’s jurisdiction, and filed a custody action in Massachusetts. Massachusetts court entered temporary order granting custody of BCB to mother.

Colorado and Massachusetts courts conferred, and Colorado court asserted temporary emergency jurisdiction, ordering mother to return to the state and set a hearing to determine custody. After the hearing, Colorado district court was able to determine that Idaho was actually BCB’s home state under the UCCJEA, but both parties expressed reluctance for Idaho to take jurisdiction and therefore either Colorado or Massachusetts could exercise jurisdiction under § 14-13-201(1)(d), C.R.S. 2014. District court of Colorado then declined jurisdiction on the basis that Colorado was not the most appropriate forum and determined that BCB had more significant connections with Massachusetts.

Also ruled by Colorado Court of Appeals was that the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act (UCAPA) did not supersede jurisdiction determination made under UCCJEA and that mother’s alleged unjustifiable conduct in not returning to Colorado with child did not provide Colorado court sufficient basis on which to assume jurisdiction.

Labels for the post: jurisdiction, Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, custody