In Re Alanis, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 5267

Relator Alanis filed a mandamus petition challenging the trial court’s February 7, 2011 order denying his plea to the jurisdiction and request to decline jurisdiction in favor of California as an inconvenient forum.
The underlying matter concerns a 2002 SAPCR where Alanis and Blair were joint managing conservators, with Alanis designated as the primary residence designee for the child A.B.A.
In August 2010, Alanis and the child moved from Texas to Danville, California, and as of August 17, 2010 none of them resided in Texas.
Blair filed a modification petition in Bexar County, Texas, on September 27, 2010; Alanis had previously filed a California registration request on September 1, 2010 to modify visitation there.
The trial court denied Alanis’ plea to the jurisdiction and his request to decline Texas jurisdiction; the mandamus petition followed.
The court ultimately held Texas lacked exclusive continuing jurisdiction but that Texas could still exercise jurisdiction if initial-determination criteria under § 152.201(a) were met; the court also held Texas was an inconvenient forum and issued mandamus relief to decline jurisdiction in California.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Texas had jurisdiction to modify the custody order	Alanis asserts Texas lost exclusive continuing jurisdiction after moving to California and California did not have initial jurisdiction.	Blair contends Texas maintained jurisdiction under 152.202 and 152.201 because the initial determination could still be modified there.	Texas jurisdiction did not exist for the modification, but Texas could nonetheless proceed under 152.201(a)(4).
Whether Texas is an inconvenient forum warranting a decline of jurisdiction to California	Texas is inconvenient; California is the more appropriate forum given residence in California and travel burdens.	Texas should retain jurisdiction; California is not a clearly more appropriate forum.	The trial court abused its discretion in denying the inconvenient-forum motion; mandamus relief granted to decline jurisdiction in favor of California.

Geary v. Peavy, 878 S.W.2d 602 (Tex. 1994) (mandamus review appropriate in custody disputes with jurisdictional issues)
In re Burk, 252 S.W.3d 736 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2008) (mandamus review of jurisdictional rulings in child-custody cases)
Burk, 252 S.W.3d 736 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2008) (same as above)
Mayhew v. Town of Sunnyvale, 964 S.W.2d 922 (Tex.1998) (jurisdiction questions reviewed de novo; limits of home-state analysis)
Powell v. Stover, 165 S.W.3d 322 (Tex. 2005) (jurisdiction in family-law mandamus context)
In re McCoy, 52 S.W.3d 297 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 2001) (methodology for assessing initial jurisdiction)
In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124 (Tex. 2004) (adequacy of appellate relief in mandamus determinations; balancing test)
Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833 (Tex.1992) (abuse of discretion standard and mandamus review principles)
In re Pirelli Tire, L.L.C., 247 S.W.3d 670 (Tex.2007) (forum non conveniens akin analysis supports mandamus relief)