10. What if there is a custody order from another state other than New Jersey?
In many custody cases, there are different states of jurisdiction that are involved. It is not uncommon for a spouse to leave New Jersey once he or she encounters marital problems. In many cases, a person may obtain a custody order from another state. If there is a custody order from another state besides New Jersey, then a determination must be made if the order will be enforced. In New Jersey, our courts do not always give “full faith and credit†to a sister state’s custody decree. The reason for this policy is that custody judgments involve continuing relationships, and they are always subject to changing conditions. When a New Jersey court reviews an out of state custody order, it must look to the basis of the court’s jurisdiction, the location of the child, and the court’s access to necessary info about the child and its present custodian. Moreover, the New Jersey court will not enforce an out of state custody order if it is not in the best interests of the child.
11. What is the UCCJA?
The UCCJA stands for the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act. The purpose of the UCCJA is for states to cooperate with one another in placing children up for adoption. The UCCJA permits jurisdiction to be exercised by the home state or a state having a significant connection with the child. The UCCJA was enacted to allow the states to avoid jurisdictional competition in bitter custody disputes. It also ensures that custody cases are litigated in the state that has the closest connection with the parties and the child. Under the UCCJA, a New Jersey court has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination if the child resides in New Jersey at the time of the filing of the custody case, or if New Jersey has been the child’s home state within six (6) months before the commencement of the case. The court will also assume jurisdiction of the custody case if it is in the child’s best interests, if one parent has significant ties to New Jersey, or if there is substantial evidence regarding the child’s present or future care in the Garden State. Under the UCCJA, there are four standards that are used to determine if an alternate jurisdiction should be granted. The four standards are: (1) the state is or has been, within six months of the custody case, “the home state†of the child; (2) it is in the best interests of the child to proceeds in the former state because the child and the family have a significant connection there; (3) the child is present in the jurisdiction and is abandoned or threatened with harm; and (4) no other state has jurisdiction and it is in the best interests of the child that the former state entertain that dispute. 12. What happens if there is a custody dispute that involves different countries? A custody dispute that involves different countries is becoming more common all of the time. I am sure that many people have heard of the case wherein a man marries a “hot looking†latina woman. Quite frequently, once marital problems arise, the latina women moves back to South America, Central America, the Dominican Republic, or to the Caribbean. Moreover, those arranged marriages from India often are a disaster. I have heard of many cases wherein the Indian wife leaves her husband and goes back to India. Quite often, the Indian wife also leaves with the child(ren). The plain truth of the matter is that the world is getting smaller as each generation passes. In the near future, inter-country custody disputes will be just as common as interstate custody disputes. The UCCJA also applies to international custody disputes in a case where the child has been removed from the United States. If a child is removed from New Jersey to another country, then a person can apply to have any international custody dispute decided by a New Jersey Court. However, it may be difficult to have a New Jersey custody order to be enforced in another country.
13. What is the Hague Convention?
On October 25, 1980, an international convention was held at the Hague. Here, numerous resolutions were adopted that concerned the wrongful removal of children from their home country. The resolutions of the Hague Convention was ratified by the United States in 1988. A parent has one year, as per United States law, to apply under the Hague for the wrongful removal of a child. Under the Hague Convention, a parent may also oppose the return of a child. The parent has the burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, that one of the following exceptions apply. 1. The person was not actually exercising custody rights at the time of the removal or retention or had acquiesced to the removal or retention; 2. There is a grave risk that his or her return would expose the child to physical psychological harm and place the child in an intolerable situation; 3. The child objects to being returned.
14. What if a spouse has consent from the other spouse to move to another country, is it still possible for one spouse to compel the other to move back to the United States?
The party who remains in the United States can apply to the court for a modification of the custody agreement. However, before this application can be made, the person must satisfy the four requirements of the Hague Convention. The party who still resides in the United States must prove that: (1) both countries participate in the Hague Convention; (2) that the child was a habitual resident of the United States immediately before the removal; (3) that the child is under the age of 16; and (4) that the removal of the child was wrongful. If the person who still lives in the United States can prove these four requirements, then he can make an application in the foreign country where the child is now residing for custody.
15. When will a New Jersey Court recognize a foreign country’s decision regarding custody?
A New Jersey court will recognize a foreign country’s decision regarding custody, provided that the foreign country had adequate jurisdiction over the case, the New Jersey spouse had adequate notice, and the other country considered the “best interests†of the child.
Continue Reading