Moving jurisdiction possible?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

brianp

New Member
My wife won the custody hearing for her four children in September of this year. The children were residing with their father in Idaho, but now in Pennsylvania with us. How can she get Idaho to release their jurisdiction allowing Pennsylvania to hold? Father has already told mother that he will pay support if/when he sees fit. He skipped Thanksgiving Break (10 days) which we believe should entitle my wife to additional support since it was based on actual number of overnights spent with each parent. We also anticipate the same happening for Spring Break since father has stated 10 days is not worth it to him. These 20 days are almost a full month of support he is avoiding paying by refusing/declining his visitation. Rather than traveling back and forth to Idaho all over again, we would like to have the children's new state of residence adopt the order and enforce it, hopefully with the help of Idaho. Could it be "transferred" to Pennsylvania or can she just file for support here in Pennsylvania as they are residents here now?
Thanks in advance for everyone's input...
 
If the father remains in Idaho, jurisdiction remains there unless the father VOLUNTARILY requests that it be moved to Pennsylvania. Even then, Idaho can very well retain jurisdiction.

There's no credit for an NCP who doesn't utilize visitation time, incidentally.

The answers haven't changed since the last time you asked ;)
 
Update: My wife just received certified mail from the childrens' father stating he is relocating to Washington State. Since the children now reside with their mother in Pennsylvania and their father will be residing in Washington State, would Idaho still hold jurisdiction? Since there are no ties left to Idaho, can my wife now try to have jurisdiction changed? If so, how does she go about initiating it in Pennsylvania?
Thanks again for any help...
 
Try reading the uniform child custody jurisdiction enforcement act. Or the uniform interstate family support act. See if that helps.
 
Last edited:
Really! Are you one of those kind of people that have to down everyone. Even when they are trying to help someone out. Get a life. You didn't have to say anything. I didn't ask you anything. And if you don't like it. Don't read it.
 
9grandprix7 said:
Really! Are you one of those kind of people that have to down everyone. Even when they are trying to help someone out. Get a life. You didn't have to say anything. I didn't ask you anything. And if you don't like it. Don't read it.
Click to expand...


Point being, you're not helping. But thanks for trying.

And please rein in the attitude.
 
Ok, I thought this was a site to try and help people. But I guess I was wrong. What i'm seeing is that it's a site to try and start fights. And to be childish and stupid.
 
And i'll say something else. The information that I posted is helpful. They both address the jurisdiction issue. And yes the original post maybe old. But I see people are still visiting it. The two of you are. And it may not help the person that originally posted but it might help someone else. So the two of you really need to keep your self glorifying comments to yourself. Because they really are not helping anyone. And they don't directly relate to the issue.
 
And starting off a post with the term "really?" Is very derogatory. In case you didn't catch that. So, yes it upset me. It's was crude and uncalled for. So the next time you want to get to the "point". Then really get to the point.
 
The volunteers here spend countless hours trying to help people. That's the purpose of the forum. It is obviously not a forum about starting fights. I understand your defensiveness but you've also got to be accurate and truthful. Insulting the volunteers isn't wise.

Let me try to explain further.

When the OP hasn't logged in for several months (as is the case here) the thread is considered "dead". It simply doesn't make sense to "resurrect" such a thread, and oft-times doing so is actually considered bad "netiquette". In fact, posting information to an old thread is can be dangerous because information and laws can change over time.

That's not saying that the information a late poster submits is automatically invalid - it is often often perfectly valid - just that it generally doesn't help the Original Poster (if only because s/he is well and truly gone from the site). And THAT is the point.

If you have valid information to submit, then by all means post it to a recent thread.

Make sense now?
 
Last edited:
I apologize for how I sounded. Did not mean it to sound that way. I should have said that while your advice is good, it is pointless to post it on a dead thread, but thanks for the effort.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top