In re Guardianship of S.T.
912 N.W.2d 262
Neb.2018Background
- S.T., born Nov. 2009 in Beatrice, NE, lived with parents Andrew T. and Anne T. in Humboldt, NE, until they moved with S.T. to Emporia, KS on Feb. 27, 2017.
- On Mar. 1, 2017, Anne’s brother Gabe N. Stalder filed for temporary and permanent guardianship in Richardson County (NE), alleging parental unfitness; the court granted a limited temporary guardianship and set an evidentiary hearing.
- At the hearing, Stalder presented evidence challenging the parents’ care and living conditions; parents testified in their own defense and denied unfitness.
- The county court concluded Nebraska was S.T.’s “home state” under the UCCJEA, then found Stalder failed to prove parental unfitness by clear and convincing evidence and denied guardianship.
- Stalder appealed. The Nebraska Supreme Court reviewed whether the county court had jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) and whether it was the child’s home state on the filing date.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Nebraska court had initial jurisdiction under the UCCJEA | Stalder argued Nebraska was the child’s home state (child lived in NE until move) | Parents argued they and the child had relocated to KS before the filing, so Nebraska lacked jurisdiction | Held: Nebraska was not the home state on Mar. 1, 2017; county court lacked UCCJEA jurisdiction |
| Whether a person "acting as a parent" living in NE would support jurisdiction under §43-1238(a)(1) | Stalder (resident of NE) could be considered a person acting as a parent supporting jurisdiction | Parents: Stalder never had legal or six months’ physical custody and thus is not a person acting as a parent | Held: Stalder did not meet statutory definition; he was not a person acting as a parent |
| Whether the trial court could reach the merits absent UCCJEA jurisdiction | Stalder proceeded to present merits evidence of parental unfitness | Parents contended lack of jurisdiction precluded merits adjudication | Held: Without UCCJEA jurisdiction, trial court (and appellate court) cannot decide the merits; judgment must be vacated and proceeding dismissed |
| Whether any UCCJEA exceptions applied to confer jurisdiction | Stalder implicitly relied on home-state analysis; no record developed on exceptions | Parents noted no evidence for exceptions (significant connections, substantial evidence in NE) | Held: Court limited review to home-state issue; record lacked evidence to evaluate exceptions, so none applied |
Key Cases Cited
- Watson v. Watson, 272 Neb. 647 (discussing UCCJEA jurisdictional review)
- Carter v. Carter, 276 Neb. 840 (UCCJEA home-state and exceptions analysis)
- In re Interest of Violet T., 286 Neb. 949 (statutory interpretation of UCCJEA provisions)
- In re Guardianship of David G., 18 Neb. App. 918 (guardianship is a child custody proceeding under UCCJEA)
- Kozal v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm., 297 Neb. 938 (principle that an appellate court lacks power to decide merits when trial court lacked jurisdiction)