Fernandez-Abin v. Sanchez
191 Cal. App. 4th 1015
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Husband and wife, both Mexican nationals, have two children born in San Diego (1998 and 2003).
- Wife filed for legal separation and divorce in Tijuana, Mexico, and custody orders were issued granting wife custody and restricting husband’s travel; reciprocal visitation orders were later issued in Mexico.
- In 2008 husband abducted the children from Mexico and took them to the United States, prompting Mexican and U.S. proceedings including a Hague petition.
- Wife filed a DVPA petition in San Diego (DV028320) in late 2008 seeking protection for herself and the children; a temporary restraining order and custody orders were entered, giving wife primary custody and suspending husband’s visitation.
- Judge Wohlfeil in December 2008 declined to exercise temporary emergency jurisdiction over the children, indicating Mexican court jurisdiction was exclusive; the California court then dismissed the children from the DVPA proceedings for lack of jurisdiction.
- In 2009, Judge Schall granted a permanent DVPA restraining order, including the children, and considered custody/visitation issues, while later deciding to remand to apply the UCCJEA framework; the court ultimately reversed the portion of the order concerning the children and remanded for proper UCCJEA-based determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether UCCJEA governs custody/jurisdiction in DVPA proceeding. | Sanchez argues UCCJEA governs custody determinations and supersedes Mexican orders. | Sanchez contends Mexico already had exclusive jurisdiction; UCCJEA does not apply to a DVPA-initiated custody issue. | Yes, UCCJEA governs custody determinations in cross-border cases. |
| Whether California could revisit emergency jurisdiction under 3424 after domestic violence findings. | Sanchez argues prior Mexico orders barred reconsideration. | Wohlfeil’s December 2008 order was final against emergency reconsideration. | California could revisit emergency jurisdiction under 3424 in light of later abuse findings. |
| Whether including the children in the DVPA order was proper given Mexican jurisdiction. | Sanchez contends inclusion violated exclusive Mexican jurisdiction. | Wife sought protection for children present in California; UCCJEA permits inter-jurisdictional action. | Reversed portion relating to the children; remanded for UCCJEA-based determination. |
| Whether the April 9/16, 2009 orders complied with UCCJEA procedural requirements (notice, period, and communications). | Schall’s orders lacked explicit section 3424 compliance. | Orders were within the court’s protective authority. | Remand required to ensure proper 3424 compliance and inter-court communication. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Karla C., 186 Cal.App.4th 1236 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) (UCCJEA exclusivity; foreign custody determinations must align with UCCJEA standards)
- In re Angel L., 159 Cal.App.4th 1127 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) (UCCJEA extends to protective orders in domestic violence proceedings)
- In re Marriage of Nurie, 176 Cal.App.4th 478 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) (Best interests not controlling for jurisdiction; enforcement duties under UCCJEA)
- In re C. T., 100 Cal.App.4th 101 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002) (Emergency custody bases; evidentiary hearing requirements under emergency jurisdiction)
- In re Marriage of Paillier, 144 Cal.App.4th 461 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) (First-in-time priority for custody jurisdiction; exclusive continuing jurisdiction principle)
- In re Marriage of Zierenberg, 11 Cal.App.4th 1436 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992) ( Enforcement of foreign custody determinations under UCCJEA)