In Re the Marriage of Nurie

Rule of Law:

Under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), a court that properly establishes initial home state jurisdiction retains exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over a child custody matter. This jurisdiction is not automatically lost due to a parent and child's prolonged absence from the state and can only be terminated by a subsequent judicial determination that all parties no longer reside in the state, or by the initial court's own determination that it has lost significant connections to the case.

Facts:

• Ghulam Nurie (Husband) and Fizza Rizvi (Wife) were married and resided in Fremont, California, where Husband had lived for 16 years and was a U.S. citizen.
• Their son (Son) was born in California on September 16, 2002.
• In February 2003, Wife took the five-month-old Son to Pakistan for what was understood to be a four-week family visit.
• At the end of the visit, Wife extended her stay and subsequently informed Husband in late May 2003 that she and Son would not be returning to California.
• Throughout the subsequent years, Husband continuously maintained his residence in Fremont, California, which he owned and kept available for his use.
• The parties entered into an agreement in Pakistan in December 2003 (the '2003 Compromise') which provided for their reconciliation in the United States, but Wife did not return.
• From 2004 to 2007, Husband spent prolonged periods in Pakistan to exercise limited visitation with Son.
• In October 2007, Husband returned to California with Son; Wife alleged this was a kidnapping, while Husband claimed it was a lawful recovery with government assistance.

Procedural Posture:

• On June 20, 2003, Husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage and sought child custody in the Alameda County Superior Court (California trial court).
• The trial court issued an ex parte order granting Husband temporary custody of Son.
• Wife made a special appearance through counsel to contest jurisdiction but subsequently failed to file briefs or appear at the hearing.
• On November 5, 2003, the California court found it had home state jurisdiction and entered an order granting Husband sole legal and physical custody.
• On October 1, 2003, Wife filed a competing custody action in the Guardian Court in Pakistan.
• The Pakistani court initially dismissed Wife's action, deferring to California's jurisdiction, but a subsequent appellate order incorporated a settlement agreement between the parties.
• On January 21, 2005, the California trial court entered a default judgment of dissolution against Wife, incorporating the prior order granting Husband sole custody.
• On January 8, 2008, Wife registered a 2006 Pakistani visitation order in the Alameda County Superior Court and filed a motion to enforce it and modify California's custody order.
• The trial court consolidated the actions, denied Wife's request to enforce the Pakistani order, and reaffirmed that California had exclusive, continuing jurisdiction.
• Wife appealed the trial court's jurisdictional ruling to the Court of Appeals of California.