
Originally Posted by
lesliead
Yes we've been separated. I tried to file right after I moved but was told I needed to wait until we gained residancy in Utah so after the 6 months I went back to the lawyer and got everything in order but was served before I filed. I filed the day I was served adding into the papers to get jurisdiction. (however that is done I am uncertain, my lawyer here was taking care of this end but she didn't know what I had to do in Cali)
...
I find it hard to believe your Utah lawyer is unaware of the provisions of the
UCCJEA which clearly defeats California jurisdiction. I know for a fact that califdadof3 knows all about it, and am somewhat surprised that he didn't mention it.
"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; ..."
" 'Home State' means the State in which a child lived with a parent or a person acting as a parent for at least six consecutive months immediately before the commencement of a child-custody proceeding. In the case of a child less than six months of age, the term means the State in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned. A period of temporary absence of any of the mentioned persons is part of the period."
You said your husband filed in California 8 months after you took the children to Utah. Thus, Utah is the childrens' "home state" and California was not their "home state" within the 6 months before he filed. The California court does not have jurisdiction.

Originally Posted by
califdadof3
... Was this a seperation?

Originally Posted by
lesliead
Yes we've been separated. ...
I suspect that what 'dad meant was whether there was a formal, court-approved separation agreement. That could constitute a custody order giving California jurisdiction