Interstate Custody Jurisdiction Issues in Rhode Island Family Court

October 9, 2009 By

Often, when one parent of a child moves out of state and the other remains in state, issues of jurisdiction arise when parents need to use the court system to resolve disputes. These jurisdiction questions increase in importance if the child or children move out of state also.

Jurisdiction determines which states court can hear the case. If a parent from RI moved to Florida, nobody would think its right to file a case in Colorado. Could they file in Florida? It depends.

To solve these issues, each state has adopted their own set of statutes, often referred to as a state’s version of the “Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act” (UCCJA) or “Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act” (PKPA). In Rhode Island, General Laws Chapter 15-14.1 deals with these issues.

There are three general types of jurisdiction types which determine if Rhode Island is the appropriate state to hear child issues in family court. They are “home state” jurisdiction, “emergency” jurisdiction, and “convenient forum” jurisdiction. Below are abbreviated descriptions of each type of jurisdiction. As such, they are not comprehensive, and you should consult an attorney before making a decision on your own as to where jurisdiction may exists for children in your particular case.

Home State Jurisdiction

In general, Home State jurisdiction arises in the state where a child has most recently resided for a six month consecutive period. Examples:

  • Joe and Jane and their son live in Rhode Island and have lived in RI for years. Jane moves to Massachusetts four months ago with their son. RI has home state jurisdiction.
  • Same as above but Jane moved 9 months ago. Rhode Island does not have home state jurisdiction.

Emergency Jurisdiction

Emergency jurisdiction arises temporarily if the child is physically in Rhode Island and has been abandoned or it is necessary when a child, or their parent or sibling, has been subjected to actual or threatened mistreatment or abuse. The child must be in Rhode Island. Example:

  • Mom and child have lived out of state for years. Child visits dad in Rhode Island and discloses, and dad believes, that child has been subjected to routine physical abuse by mom or her boyfriend. Assuming the allegations are credible, Rhode Island courts may exercise temporary emergency jurisdiction.

Convenient Forum Jurisdiction

Convenient forum jurisdiction arises, generally, when no other state has exercised “home state” or “emergency” jurisdiction, the child is in Rhode Island, and the court determined that Rhode Island is the most appropriate forum for jurisdiction. Example:

  • If mom and child have lived out of state for years but have never actually stayed in one place for more than a few months, and the child comes to Rhode Island. Dad lives an yet another state. If mom seeks to establish orders relating to the child, Rhode Island would likely be named the most convenient forum for jurisdiction.

For more detailed answers, contact a Rhode Island interstate custody and relocation attorney.

Don P. Moyer, 401 461-7800, Moyer Divorce Law

Filed Under: All Family Court, Custody & Placement, Interstate Enforcement & Modification Tagged With:

What’s the Difference Between Legal and Physical Custody?

October 9, 2009 By

Many states have differing terminology for legal and physical custody. In Rhode Island, legal custody is the ability to have input in major life decisions of the children in question. A person with “sole custody” has sole legal custody, and does not need to include the other parent in the decision making process things like health, education, or religious upbringing issues of the children. Couples who share “joint custody”, or joint legal custody, are required to keep each parent “in the loop” of such issues, and both parents also have the right to access information relating to those issues.

As an example, if the kids are living with dad primarily, and the parties have joint custody, then dad would need to communicate with mom about major issues, such as health, education, or religious affairs. Dad does not need to comply with mom’s wishes: mom does not have a veto ability. Mom simple must be kept in the loop. Mom on the other hand, would have the ability to, say, go to the school to speak with the teacher, or get copies of medical records, which she would not be able to do if dad had sole custody.

Physical custody, in Rhode Island, is generally described as “possession” or “physical possession.” This term described which parent is the primary caretaker of the children. The “non-custodial” parent would pay child support to the parent with “possession,” and their time with the children would be described as visitation.

Don P. Moyer, 401 461-7800, Moyer Divorce Law

Filed Under: All Family Court, Custody & Placement Tagged With:

How do the Courts Decide Custody?

October 9, 2009 By

The Rhode Island Family Courts base custody and possession decisions on the “best interest of the child.” The pivotal case Pettinato v. Pettinato, 582 A.2d 909 (R.I. 1990) states that certain factors must be weighed in the best interests of the child analysis when relevant. These factors include:

1. The wishes of the child’s parent or parents regarding the child’s custody.
2. The reasonable preference of the child, if the court deems the child to be of sufficient intelligence, understanding, and experience to express a preference.
3. The interaction and interrelationship of the child with the child’s parent or parents, the child’s siblings, and any other person who may significantly affect the child’s best interest.
4. The child’s adjustment to the child’s home, school, and community.
5. The mental and physical health of all individuals involved.
6. The stability of the child’s home environment.
7. The moral fitness of the child’s parents.
8. The willingness and ability of each parent to facilitate a close and continuous parent-child relationship between the child and the other parent.

Don P. Moyer, 401 461-7800, Moyer Divorce Law

Filed Under: All Family Court, Custody & Placement, Divorce Tagged With:

Dupre v. Dupre (857 A.2d 242 (RI 2002))

September 14, 2009 By

Link to Case PDF

This pivotal case is the centerpiece in any litigation regarding relocation of children out of the State of Rhode Island.  The case came about when a judge implemented a trial Justice denied a petition to allow the removal of the child from the jurisdiction on the basis that there was “no compelling reason to do.”

The RI Supreme considered that standard incorrect, and laid out certain factors to be considered in any relocation matter.  With the understanding that the “best interest of the children” is the foremost consideration when [Read more...]

Filed Under: All Family Court, Child Relocation, Custody & Placement, Interstate Enforcement & Modification Tagged With: ,