SHARON G. NEWCOMB, APPELLANT,
v.
STEPHEN C. NEWCOMB, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida courts have jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act to determine whether a California custody proceeding is exercising jurisdiction substantially in conformity with the Act when the child's home state is Florida.
Florida had jurisdiction to hear the mother's petition because Florida was the home state of the minor child at the time the petition was filed, allowing Florida courts to determine whether California's exercise of jurisdiction complied with the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act.
[1] Under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, a state that is the home state of a minor child has jurisdiction to determine whether another state with concurrent juri…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA couple divorced in California in 1986 while residing there. The mother retained primary custody of their minor child and moved to Florida with the c…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Child Custody Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
FERGUSON, Judge.
In 1986, the parties obtained a divorce in California where they were living at the time. The mother, who had primary custody of the parties’ minor child, and the minor child subsequently moved to Florida. Five months later the father filed an action in California seeking a change of child custody. Six months after the move to Florida, while the father’s action was pending, the mother brought an action in this state seeking, obviously, protection from the father’s California action.
We disagree with the trial court’s determination that it was without jurisdiction to hear the mother’s petition. Florida was the home state of the minor child when the custodial mother filed the Florida petition; therefore, Florida had jurisdiction to determine whether the California court, which also had jurisdiction, was exercising jurisdiction “substantially in conformity” with the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act. § 61.1314(1), Fla.Stat. (1985); Hickey v. Baxter, 461 So. 2d 1364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Greene v. Greene, 432 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Hernandez v. Hernandez, 406 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); see also Al-Fassi v. Al-Fassi, 433 So. 2d 664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 446 So. 2d 99 (Fla.1984); Bonis v. Bonis, 420 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied, 430 So. 2d 450 (Fla.1983).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Siegel v. Siegel, 575 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1991)…urt having such priority is ‘exercising jurisdiction substantially in conformity with [the UCCJA].’ ” Hickey v. Baxter, 461 So. 2d 1364, 1369 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) (quoting § 61.1314(1), Fla.Stat. (1983)) (emphasis added); see also Newcomb v. Newcomb, 507 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (Florida court had jurisdiction to determine whether California court was substantially in conformity with UCCJA in custody action previously filed in California). The trial court in the instant case correctly found that the New Y…1 / 2
-
Karen Chaddick f/n/a Karen Monopoli v. Monopoli, 677 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…also Rosso v. Farnell, 581 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (Florida trial court should make a determination based on copies of pleadings filed in other court, transcripts, etc., to determine which was the more appropriate forum.); Newcomb v. Newcomb, 507 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (Florida has jurisdiction as a child’s home state to determine whether another state is exercising jurisdiction substantially in conformity with the UCCJA). . Even if Virginia had subject matter jurisdiction, which it did not, it…1 / 2
-
Steward v. Steward, 588 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…nd REMANDED. HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . See e.g., Mast v. Reed, 578 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) (en banc); Cole v. Cole, 530 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). . See e.g., Siegel v. Siegel, 575 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1991). Newcomb v. Newcomb, 507 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), cited by the mother, is erroneous in applying, in a modification proceeding, legal principles governing initial jurisdiction determinations.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hickey v. Baxter, 461 So. 2d 1364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Greene v. Greene, 432 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Bonis v. Bonis, 420 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Sheikha Dena Al-Fassi v. Sheikh Mohammed Al-Fassi, 433 So. 2d 664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Sarduy v. Martinez, 406 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Hernandez v. Hernandez, 406 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)