B.W.D. v. B.W. (In Re Interest of S.W.)
2017 UT 37
| Utah | 2017Background
- Parents divorced in Utah; Utah district court awarded initial custody to Mother (2007) then to Father (2010). Father moved to Kansas in 2013 with the two younger children; older sibling B.W.D. remained in Utah.
- In 2014 and again in 2016 B.W.D. filed juvenile petitions alleging Father abused/neglected the younger sisters and seeking custody (first requesting custody for Mother, later seeking custody for herself).
- After Mother’s arrest for custodial interference in Kansas, Kansas issued requisition orders; Utah briefly granted those requisitions and returned the children to Kansas in early 2016.
- On March 24, 2016 B.W.D. filed an amended petition seeking custody for herself; the juvenile court sua sponte dismissed the petition on March 31, 2016, concluding Utah was an inconvenient forum and alternatively citing “unjustifiable conduct” by Mother and imputing it to B.W.D. without hearing.
- The juvenile court also dismissed a Guardian ad Litem’s Order to Show Cause (OSC) as moot based on its jurisdictional dismissal. B.W.D. appealed; the Utah Supreme Court granted certification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the juvenile court violate due process by dismissing B.W.D.’s petition without giving her an opportunity to be heard? | B.W.D.: court denied her statutory and procedural right to be heard before dismissal. | Juvenile court: dismissed sua sponte based on inconvenient forum/unjustifiable conduct (no adversary briefing noted). | Held for B.W.D.: dismissal without an opportunity to be heard violated due process; reversal and remand. |
| Did the court properly apply the UCCJEA inconvenient-forum provision (Utah Code § 78B-13-207)? | B.W.D.: court failed to follow §207’s required procedures (allow briefing, consider listed factors, and decline only after another state custody proceeding is commenced). | Juvenile court: concluded Kansas was more appropriate forum and dismissed. | Held: court misapplied §207 by not allowing parties to submit information or consider required factors; dismissal under §207 was erroneous. |
| Was it appropriate to decline jurisdiction under the UCCJEA unjustifiable-conduct provision (Utah Code § 78B-13-208) by attributing Mother’s misconduct to B.W.D.? | B.W.D.: §208 applies only when jurisdiction exists solely because of unjustifiable conduct; imputing Mother’s conduct to B.W.D. without findings or hearing was unlawful. | Juvenile court: found Mother engaged in unjustifiable conduct and imputed it to B.W.D., warranting declination. | Held: court erred—§208 did not apply because Utah already had continuing jurisdiction under §78B-13-202; attributing Mother’s conduct to B.W.D. without hearing was factually unsupported and denied due process. |
| Was dismissal of the Guardian ad Litem’s OSC proper because of the court’s jurisdictional ruling? | GAL: OSC should proceed; jurisdictional dismissal premature/erroneous. | Juvenile court: OSC moot after dismissal of petition for lack of jurisdiction. | Held: reversal of OSC dismissal as it was based on erroneous jurisdictional conclusions; remand for proper jurisdictional analysis and potential merits consideration. |
Key Cases Cited
- Nevares v. Adoptive Couple, 384 P.3d 213 (Utah 2016) (UCCJEA purpose—avoid interstate custody conflicts)
- In re A.C.M., 221 P.3d 185 (Utah 2009) (standard of review for jurisdictional questions)
- In re W.A., 63 P.3d 607 (Utah 2002) (appellate review of factual findings underlying jurisdiction)
- Salt Lake Legal Def. Ass'n v. Atherton, 267 P.3d 227 (Utah 2011) (due process requires notice and meaningful opportunity to be heard)
- Harrison v. Harrison, 462 P.2d 170 (Utah 1969) (absence of respondent brief does not automatically preclude review)
- Allen v. Friel, 194 P.3d 903 (Utah 2008) (appellate courts are not repositories for undeveloped argument)
- B.A.M. Dev., L.L.C. v. Salt Lake Cty., 282 P.3d 41 (Utah 2012) (courts will not formulate arguments for an unbriefed party)