In Re McCoy
2001 WL 723167, 52 S.W.3d 297 (2001)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under the Texas Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), a court's subject matter jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination is assessed at the moment a proceeding is commenced in that court. If, on that date, another state qualifies as the child's 'home state,' the Texas court lacks jurisdiction.
Facts:
- Michelle Sharlene McCoy and Michael William McCoy are former spouses and United States citizens with two minor children.
- The family lived in Texas for most of their marriage before moving to Qatar in 1996 for Michael's job as a petroleum engineer.
- The family lived together in Qatar until October 1999.
- In October 1999, Michelle took the children and moved from Qatar to Arkansas, where her parents lived.
Procedural Posture:
- Shortly after October 1999, Michelle McCoy filed suit in an Arkansas court seeking divorce and child support.
- In the same month, Michael McCoy filed for divorce in Qatar.
- Michael McCoy was personally served in Arkansas for the Arkansas lawsuit.
- The Arkansas court asserted jurisdiction and issued temporary orders regarding the children.
- In October 2000, a Qatari court granted the parties a divorce but deferred on custody matters, stating Texas was a more appropriate forum.
- In February 2001, Michael McCoy filed suit in the 92nd Judicial District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, seeking child custody.
- The Hidalgo County court denied Michelle McCoy's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and issued an order granting Michael immediate possession of the children.
- Michelle McCoy (Relator) filed a petition for a writ of mandamus with the Texas Court of Appeals, asking it to order the Hidalgo County court to dismiss the case.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a Texas court have subject matter jurisdiction under the Texas Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) to make an initial child custody determination when, at the time the Texas proceeding was commenced, another state qualified as the children's 'home state'?
Opinions:
Majority - Dorsey, Justice.
No. A Texas court does not have subject matter jurisdiction because jurisdiction is determined on the date a proceeding commences in Texas, and by that date, Arkansas had become the children's 'home state.' The court reasoned that the Texas UCCJEA provides the exclusive means for determining jurisdiction, with the primary basis being the 'home state' of the child. The 'commencement of the proceeding' under the statute refers to the filing of the first pleading in a Texas court. In this case, Michael McCoy filed suit in Texas in February 2001, by which time the children had lived in Arkansas with their mother for over a year, establishing Arkansas as their home state. The court rejected the trial court's use of an earlier date (when a suit was filed in Qatar) as the operative date for the jurisdictional analysis. Because Arkansas was the home state when the Texas suit was filed, and the Arkansas court had not declined jurisdiction, no provision of the Texas UCCJEA conferred jurisdiction upon the Hidalgo County court.
Analysis:
This case provides a critical clarification on the timing aspect of jurisdictional analysis under the UCCJEA. It establishes a bright-line rule that jurisdiction is determined at the moment a petition is filed in the forum state, not when related proceedings began elsewhere. This holding emphasizes that a parent's delay in filing can result in the loss of jurisdiction in a preferred forum, as another state can acquire 'home state' status in the interim. The decision reinforces the UCCJEA's goal of preventing jurisdictional competition by prioritizing the state with the closest connection to the child at the time of filing, thereby discouraging forum shopping and prolonged litigation.
