478 P.3d 438
Okla.2020Background:
- Parents share one minor child; multiple divorce actions were filed in Kansas and Oklahoma between 2017–2019.
- Father filed a Kansas divorce in Sept 2017; a default decree was later set aside and Kansas entered temporary custody orders and a parenting plan while the case was pending.
- Parties jointly dismissed the Kansas case without prejudice on Oct. 15, 2018 (before Father filed his Oklahoma divorce).
- Father moved to Beaver County, Oklahoma in mid‑2018 and filed Oklahoma divorce proceedings (two filings; Oklahoma II filed Oct. 18, 2018 and refiled Jan. 24, 2019).
- Oklahoma trial court ruled it lacked initial custody/support jurisdiction under the UCCJEA, concluding Kansas had exclusive, continuing jurisdiction; Father appealed.
- Oklahoma Supreme Court held the joint dismissal rendered the Kansas custody proceeding of no effect for UCCJEA purposes and remanded for the trial court to determine whether Oklahoma had become the child’s new "home state" (six‑month rule) and, if so, to decide forum non conveniens; if not, transfer to Kansas.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Effect of prior Kansas custody proceeding that was dismissed without prejudice on Oklahoma's ability to make an initial custody determination | Father: Kansas dismissal nullified that proceeding; no pending sister‑state case, so OK may be initial forum | Mother: Kansas was first to make an initial determination and therefore retains exclusive, continuing jurisdiction | Dismissal nullified the Kansas proceeding for UCCJEA analysis; trial court erred to rely on it to deny jurisdiction |
| Whether Oklahoma was the child’s "home state" under the UCCJEA (six consecutive months before commencement) | Father: child lived with him in Oklahoma for >6 months before filing, establishing OK home state | Mother: prior Kansas orders and contacts make Kansas the proper home state | Remanded for trial court to determine factual residency for the six‑month home‑state test; if OK is home state, OK must make initial determination |
| Applicability of the UCCJEA prohibition on simultaneous proceedings (§ 551‑206) | Father: no simultaneous proceedings because Kansas action was terminated before Oklahoma filing | Mother: prior Kansas rulings grant Kansas continuing jurisdiction despite dismissal | § 551‑206 not triggered here because Kansas proceeding was terminated prior to OK filing; no simultaneous pending proceedings |
| Forum non conveniens if Oklahoma is home state (§ 551‑207) | Father: seeks OK adjudication (implicit) | Mother: urges Oklahoma to decline and yield jurisdiction to Kansas as more appropriate forum | If OK is home state, trial court must hear and decide forum non conveniens using statutory factors and may stay/condition transfer if appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- S.W. v. Duncan, 24 P.3d 846 (2001 OK) (divorce is a child custody proceeding under the UCCJEA; initial‑determination rule)
- Holt v. Dist. Ct., 626 P.2d 1336 (1981 OK) (UCCJA purpose: avoid interstate custody conflict and promote stability)
- G.S. v. Ewing, 786 P.2d 65 (1990 OK) (continuing jurisdiction is not perpetual; courts may lose jurisdiction)
- C.H. v. O'Malley, 140 N.E.3d 589 (Ohio 2019) (voluntary dismissal without prejudice leaves parties as if no action was brought for UCCJEA home‑state analysis)
- Campbell v. Tardio, 323 P.3d 317 (Or. Ct. App. 2014) (contrasting approach: prior custody judgment not nullified by later dismissal absent motion to set aside)
- Redwine v. Wood, 33 P.3d 53 (2001 Okla. Civ. App.) (trial court must examine whether another state made an initial custody determination under UCCJEA)