IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JONES
430 P.3d 544, 2018 OK CIV APP 68 (2018)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under the Oklahoma Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (OUCCJEA), a court cannot exercise initial child custody jurisdiction unless it qualifies as the child's 'home state,' defined as the state where the child has lived for six consecutive months immediately preceding the commencement of the proceeding. This subject matter jurisdiction requirement cannot be waived by the parties or conferred by their consent or subsequent pleadings.
Facts:
- Gregory Robert Jones (Father) and Samantha Lynn White (Mother) were married in 2012 and had two children.
- The family resided in Massachusetts from 2012 until early 2015.
- On March 2, 2015, the entire family moved from Massachusetts to Oklahoma.
- On May 19, 2015, after living in Oklahoma for approximately two and a half months, the family traveled to New Hampshire for a funeral.
- During the trip to New Hampshire, Mother informed Father that she wanted a divorce.
- Mother and the two children remained in New Hampshire at her mother's house, while Father returned to Oklahoma alone.
Procedural Posture:
- On May 27, 2015, Father filed a petition for separate maintenance and sought temporary custody of the children in the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma (trial court).
- The trial court held a temporary order hearing, which Mother did not attend, and awarded temporary custody to Father.
- In mid-September 2015, Father enforced the temporary order and took physical custody of the children from Mother.
- On October 21, 2015, Mother filed a Motion to Vacate the custody order, arguing the trial court lacked jurisdiction under the OUCCJEA.
- Father later filed an Amended Petition for Divorce, and Mother filed a Cross-Petition in which she admitted Oklahoma had 'home state' jurisdiction.
- The trial court held a hearing and found that it had jurisdiction based on the parties' pleadings, dissolved the marriage, and awarded joint custody with Father as the primary custodian.
- Mother (appellant) appealed the trial court's order to the Court of Civil Appeals of the State of Oklahoma, with Father as the appellee.
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 an Oklahoma court have initial child custody jurisdiction under the Oklahoma Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (OUCCJEA) when the children have lived in the state for less than six months before the commencement of the proceeding, even if both parties later agree or plead that the state has jurisdiction?
Opinions:
Majority - Swinton, Presiding Judge
No. An Oklahoma court lacks initial child custody jurisdiction under the OUCCJEA when the children have not lived in the state for the requisite six-month period prior to the commencement of the proceeding, and this jurisdictional defect cannot be cured by the parties' consent or waiver. The OUCCJEA establishes mandatory jurisdictional rules, prioritizing 'home state' jurisdiction to ensure stability and prevent forum shopping. 'Home state' is determined at the moment the 'first pleading' is filed. In this case, Father filed his petition on May 27, 2015, at which point the children had resided in Oklahoma for less than three months, making Oklahoma ineligible as the home state. The trial court's reliance on the parties' later pleadings, in which they admitted jurisdiction, was an error because subject matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred by agreement. As Oklahoma was not the home state and lacked significant connection jurisdiction compared to Massachusetts, the trial court's custody orders are void.
Analysis:
This case reinforces the strict, non-waivable nature of subject matter jurisdiction under the OUCCJEA, emphasizing that the 'home state' analysis is a mandatory prerequisite that cannot be sidestepped by party agreement. It clarifies that the jurisdictional clock is fixed at the time of the initial filing and cannot be altered by subsequent events or amended pleadings. The decision serves as a critical reminder to legal practitioners that they must correctly identify the home state at the outset of a custody dispute, as any orders from a court lacking jurisdiction are void. This holding protects the integrity of the OUCCJEA's framework, which aims to prevent conflicting state court orders and ensure custody decisions are made in the forum with the most significant ties to the child.
