Summary 2007 WY 154

Summary of Decision issued September 25, 2007

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses "Universal Citation" and was given an "official" citation when issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will note that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation, the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion should include the reporter page number. If you need assistance, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Symington v. Symington

Citation: 2007 WY 154

Docket Number: S-07-0044

Appeal from the District Court of Sweetwater County, the Honorable Nena R. James, Judge

Representing Appellant (Defendant): Robert J. O’Neil, Gillette, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff): Mark W. Gifford, Casper, Wyoming.

Issue: Whether the trial court properly declined to exercise further child custody jurisdiction.

Facts/Discussion: Father appeals the district court’s order declining jurisdiction of a child custody dispute pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-5-307 on the basis that Idaho provided a more appropriate forum for resolution of the dispute.
Standard of Review: In child custody proceedings, the determination of whether to exercise jurisdiction or to defer to the courts of another state is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.
The district court made its decision pursuant to the inconvenient forum provision of the Wyoming UCCJEA. The evidence established that the children had lived in Idaho for nearly two years, during which time they had attended Idaho schools and seen a counselor there. It reflected that the GAL had often been limited to telephone conversations with the children because of the distance involved. Father lived in Gillette so that the district court in Sweetwater County was no longer a convenient forum for either party.
The decision to decline jurisdiction is not based on fault. Rather it is a determination of which forum is more appropriate.

Holding: There was sufficient evidence to support the district court’s decision to defer to the jurisdiction of the Idaho court. The Court noted that by the time Mother filed her most recent motion, the one now under review, the children had lived in Idaho longer, more of their school and counseling records had accumulated there, and the majority of witnesses with pertinent information were there. Combining these factors with the need to appoint another GAL, the Court was unable to find any abuse of discretion by the district court in declining jurisdiction.

Affirmed.

J. Burke delivered the opinion.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/3coeav .

Summary 2007 WY 153

Summary of Decision issued September 25, 2007

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses "Universal Citation" and was given an "official" citation when issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will note that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation, the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion should include the reporter page number. If you need assistance, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Prickett, n/k/a Wendelin v. Prickett

Citation: 2007 WY 153

Docket Number: 06-282

Appeal from the District Court of Goshen County, the Honorable Keith G. Kautz, Judge

Representing Appellant (Plaintiff): Eric Eugene Jones, Wheatland, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee (Defendant): Ronald G. Pretty, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Issues: Whether the district court’s finding that the State of Nebraska did not have jurisdiction of the child custody case was contrary to the evidence. Whether the district court’s finding that Wyoming was the most convenient forum for child custody and visitation was arbitrary and capricious.

Facts/Discussion: Mother claims that the district court erred in its decision that Wyoming, not Nebraska, retains exclusive, continuing jurisdiction pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-5-302 over custody and visitation issues arising form the parties’ Wyoming divorce decree.
Standard of Review: The Court reviews a district court’s decision regarding its jurisdiction in child custody matters de novo. In contrast, they review a court’s decision whether or not to decline jurisdiction under the inconvenient forum provisions of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-5-307 for an abuse of discretion.
The case required the Court to apply Wyoming’s version of the UCCJEA. The district court determined that the two part test of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-5-302(a)(i) was not met because although Mother and children moved to Nebraska, Father continued to live in Wyoming.
The district court found that Wyoming was not an inconvenient forum. This was based on the factual findings which the Court found to be supported by evidence in the record.
Nebraska allows foreign custody orders to be registered in the state to ease enforcement of those orders. The district court properly recognized the distinction between Father consenting to registration of his Wyoming custody order and consenting to Nebraska taking jurisdiction.
The Court also noted that Nebraska had also adopted the UCCJEA with jurisdictional requirements nearly identical to those set forth in Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 20-5-301 to 20-5-310. There was no evidence in the record that the Nebraska jurisdictional requirements had been satisfied.

Holding: The district court maintained exclusive, continuing jurisdiction to resolve custody and visitation issues arising from the parties’ original Wyoming divorce decree. The Court found no abuse of discretion in the district court’s determination that Wyoming remained an appropriate jurisdictional forum.

Affirmed.

J. Burke delivered the opinion.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/32xldn .