Because the law says the courts of one state should defer to the courts of another court. Sometimes the statute says to do so if the other state would be more convenient to the parties, witnesses, etc. The answer really depends on the specifics. What's the case about.

Well... I would prefer not to put too many details. My children and I (I'm the CP) have lived outside the state with jurisdiction for the past 5 years. This was and is a high conflict case. My XH has sued for custody twice and tried to overturn the custody order in the appellate court on a technicality. (He also presented a misleading docket statement to the appellate judge to which, TG the judge admonished his attorney for in his opinion.) He owes almost $30k in arrearage, and that state told me I had to enforce it there, then 4 years later told me I should have went to my own state for enforcement. I guess I am going into details, huh? I know we will return to court for another custody hearing, once XH has saved up enough money for a retainer and feels he has collected enough resaons to do so. I don't mind defending custody - it's an easy enough thing to do when you hold all the cards - but I do mind the money I spend on attorneys that I have to take away from my children. The case currently is stuck in limbo :-) and we expect the court may close it soon for inactivity. I consulted with an attorney in my new state that advised to motion the court to close the case and release jurisidiction because the new state would be local to teachers and other people able to testify on the children's well-being. I ultimately want to go pro se and seek counsel only when I need help with something. So I'm looking for specific guidance so I can instruct the retained attorney to do what I say - I feel he no longer is my best option and I have several valid reasons for this.

You are making a mistake if you are planning to "instruct" your Attorney how to handle your case - unless you are also an Attorney. He/she undoubtedly knows the law better than you do and is more familiar with all the facts and circumstances than we are.

Also, I would like to list in my motion my personal reasons of being able to continue pro se, the likelihood of continued custody hearings, etc. Some how convey that this is necessary to stop senseless suits, or at the very least minimize the damage to finances, which, in turn, affects my ability to care for them since I am the sole provider.

Thank you for your comment, but he has been getting paid $1000/month for the past 4 years. I would think the $18,000 I had to pay the his services during the court of appeals case makes me a better judge of his abilities, considering

Well... I would prefer not to put too many details.
Skip the relevant details and we can't help you.
But skip the irrelevant details, by all means.
Yes, I know: the problem is figuring out which is which. :)

So you are asking about jurisdiction with respect to custody? As you probably know, this would be a Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Child_Custody_Jurisdiction_And_Enforcement _Act) issue. The answer is found in the text of the act.


... that state told me I had to enforce it there, then 4 years later told me I should have went to my own state for enforcement. ...

This seems to be not a matter of custody but of child support collection. Again, not enough pertinent information I am afraid. ;)

Which states are we talking about?

That I INSTRUCTED him to motion the court when he CHOSE to merely list issues in the order of the case. That was the technicality I paid $18,000 for.

... I consulted with an attorney in my new state that advised to motion the court to close the case and release jurisidiction ...


Also, I would like to list in my motion my personal reasons of being able to continue pro se, the likelyhood of continued custody hearings, etc. Some how convey that this is necessary to stop senseless suits, or at the very least minimize the damage to finances, which, in turn, affects my ability to care for them since i am the sole provider.

Looks like you are getting set to bog down in irrelevant details again: this time in your motion.

A motion to close the case in state A because the matter should be decided in State B doesn't need to get confused with issues like whether you are going to proceed pro se. Stick to the jurisdictional question.

Also, I would like to list in my motion my personal reasons of being able to continue pro se, the likelyhood of continued custody hearings, etc. Some how convey that this is necessary to stop senseless suits, or at the very least minimize the damage to finances, which, in turn, affects my ability to care for them since i am the sole provider.


Would you please read the AMHD rules and answer in the "answer" box and not the comments portion?

bellasagesse : Thank you for your comment, but he has been getting paid $1000/month for the past 4 years. I would think the $18,000 I had to pay the his services during the court of appeals case makes me a better judge of his abilities, considering
bellasagesse : that I INSTRUCTED him to motion the court when he CHOSE to merely list issues in the order of the case. That was the technicality I paid $18,000 for.

Money spent does not equal the quality of representation.

The Peach state, the enforcement agency is now handling the support. The previous state said they needed to keep the case there to enforce support, but never enforced support. In my mind, my state is better equipped to enforce support, even if they are 2000 miles away. If I don't put something in the motion to tell the court that support is being handled by the new state, how will they know? That was the only reason to mention it in my explanation.

I want to change jurisdiction to be able to continue defending custody. Right now he holds a high card - he can make all the allegations he wants, cite change of circumstances even if flimsy, irrelevant, or frivolous. There is nothing to keep him from doing this. People have told me the court won't allow frivolous suits, but he's able to frame it so it doesn't sound frivolous. Then I have to pay the attorney. (why get another one? How? Do I call the someone out of the phone book? Where's my peer review system like doctors have?) Then the two of us build a defense to take apart each allegation - we have the burden to disprove each allegation instead of my exhusband having the burden of proof to say it exists. Then the court likes court psychologists - each evaluation has cost around $15,000. The first time, I have to pay up front to proceed but then my XH said he couldn't pay his half. Do you have any idea how much money we have wasted? He told me he would drive me into the ground unless I gave up custody and he is succeeding. In the meantime, he has no money. I have no money. My entire paycheck goes to bills and I squeeze out what I can for the kids. I make 6 figures, but I was able to qualify for being an adopted familiy at Christmas. Do you know what I had to do to get it, to have to explain why we were deserving when so many have so little? I have never been able to give my kids so much as our donor family did, the Cops for kids, the FD. I'm not saying to screw their dad, but don't you think it's time to I was able to get a break? Did I ask for this? Our family, to include XH or so I thought, was moving out of the state the week the divorce papers came. People like to point out that I left, but nobody listens to the whole story. XH had put us in a financial crisis to where I was going to have to stop payment on the house. I found a job that came with relocation benefits that paid the mortgage while the house waited to be sold. XH is a financial cancer with no boundaries - he has no reason when it comes to money. A reasonable man would have stopped before he self-imploded his own finances and his own life. This man is fighting in his personal Alamo.

I hope I added enough of my reasons and enough details, however, I really just want specific examples of reasons other people used in their motions.

Here's more: I married my XH in good faith. I spent 5 years believing we could overcome anything. He made himself to be something he thought I wanted, and had he been honest from the beginning, we would have never married. He house of cards were falling down and he took a preemptive strike to leave before I knew the worst of it. In a way, I'm thankful, for I have lots of happy memories to share with my kids. I spent months in therapy trying to understand the roots of what happened and I now know I am dealing with someone who is sick, like an alcoholic is sick. I have had to raise my special needs children on my own, in spite of all the crazy things he does and says (lately he has instructed the kids to throw out medicine because the pharm companies are trying to poison us). I work entirely to normalize my kids and limit my XH from destroying us all, and somehow my kids still have a very good relationship with their dad and with me.

So, what are the reasons, using specific examples?

Comments on this post
bellasagesse disagrees : Because she's a smart aleck.
.


Again please read the AMHD rules -

Another person who asks for advice and then everyone who doesn't agree is a jerk - or a smart aleck.

You continue to post irrelevant details. I assume your attitude continues into the Courtroom.

Oh, I'm a smart aleck who actually works in the legal profession.

...

Er, sorry, I guess I nodded off.

What was the question again?

What are the reasons one state will release juridiction to another? I would like specific examples, so that I can tailor it to fit my situation. Thank you.

What are the reasons one state will release juridiction to another? I would like specific examples, so that I can tailor it to fit my situation. Thank you.

Ok.

These three sections of the uniform act are the pertinent ones:


SECTION 201. INITIAL CHILD-CUSTODY JURISDICTION.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in Section 204, a court of this State has jurisdiction to make an initial child-custody determination only if:
(1) this State 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 State but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this State;
(2) a court of another State does not have jurisdiction under paragraph (1), or a court of the home State of the child has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this State is the more appropriate forum under Section 207 or 208, and:
(A) 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 State other than mere physical presence; and
(B) substantial evidence is available in this State concerning the child's care, protection, training, and personal relationships;
(3) all courts having jurisdiction under paragraph (1) or (2) have declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a court of this State is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child under Section 207 or 208; or
(4) no court of any other State would have jurisdiction under the criteria specified in paragraph (1), (2), or (3).
(b) Subsection (a) is the exclusive jurisdictional basis for making a child-custody determination by a court of this State.
(c) Physical presence of, or personal jurisdiction over, a party or a child is not necessary or sufficient to make a child-custody determination.


SECTION 202. EXCLUSIVE, CONTINUING JURISDICTION.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in Section 204, a court of this State which has made a child-custody determination consistent with Section 201 or 203 has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over the determination until:
(1) a court of this State determines that neither the child, the child's parents, and any person acting as a parent do not have a significant connection with this State and that substantial evidence is no longer available in this State concerning the child's care, protection, training, and personal relationships; or
(2) a court of this State or a court of another State determines that the child, the child's parents, and any person acting as a parent do not presently reside in this State.
(b) A court of this State which has made a child-custody determination and does not have exclusive, continuing jurisdiction under this section may modify that determination only if it has jurisdiction to make an initial determination under Section 201.


SECTION 203. JURISDICTION TO MODIFY DETERMINATION. Except as otherwise provided in Section 204, a court of this State may not modify a child-custody determination made by a court of another State unless a court of this State has jurisdiction to make an initial determination under Section 201(a)(1) or (2) and:
(1) the court of the other State determines it no longer has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction under Section 202 or that a court of this State would be a more convenient forum under Section 207; or
(2) a court of this State or a court of the other State determines that the child, the child's parents, and any person acting as a parent do not presently reside in the other State.

Let's take the language I put in bold:

The child was moved out of the state while custody was being litigated. All persons who would be witnesses have, since then, moved away. That's one example of a situation under which the court would decline jurisdiction.

If you go through the comments to the uniform act, found here (http://www.law.upenn.edu/bll/archives/ulc/fnact99/1990s/uccjea97.htm), you will find more examples.

Thank you very much.

thank you very much.

:D
You're quite welcome.