Peterson v. Jacobitz
309 Neb. 486
Neb.2021Background
- Jodi gave birth to Kooper in February 2013 in Kearney (Buffalo County); she later married and petitioned Phelps County for a stepparent adoption, naming Austin Peterson as the putative father and providing him notice.
- On Oct. 21, 2019, Austin filed a Complaint to Establish Paternity and Objection to Proposed Adoption in Phelps County. At a Dec. 17 hearing he moved to transfer the case to Buffalo County (where the child was born); Phelps County granted the transfer.
- Jodi moved to dismiss in Buffalo County, arguing Phelps never had jurisdiction under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-104.05 and therefore could not validly transfer the case; Buffalo County dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
- The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed, reasoning § 43-104.05(1) prescribes venue (file where child was born) while subject-matter jurisdiction over adoptions is vested in county courts by § 24-517, so Phelps could transfer to the correct venue.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court granted review and affirmed the Court of Appeals: § 43-104.05(1) is venue language; § 43-104.05(4)(a) governs timing/duration of a court’s exercise of authority, not the source of jurisdiction, which comes from § 24-517.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Peterson) | Defendant's Argument (Jacobitz) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Phelps County Court had subject-matter jurisdiction to hear or transfer Austin’s complaint under § 43-104.05 | Phelps has jurisdiction over adoptions under § 24-517 and could transfer; § 43-104.05(1) is venue, not jurisdiction | § 43-104.05(4)(a) vests exclusive jurisdiction in the county court where the child was born, so Phelps never had jurisdiction to act | Court affirmed Court of Appeals: Phelps had jurisdiction under § 24-517; § 43-104.05(1) is venue; transfer valid |
| Whether § 43-104.05(4)(a) confers jurisdiction or merely prescribes timing/duration of a court’s authority | (Peterson) § 43-104.05(4)(a) prescribes the period a court should exercise authority; it does not create jurisdiction | (Jacobitz) § 43-104.05(4)(a) explicitly grants jurisdiction to the county where the child was born, excluding others | Court held § 43-104.05(4)(a) addresses timing/duration; jurisdiction derives from § 24-517; reading (4)(a) as a jurisdictional grant would render other statutory language superfluous |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adoption of Micah H., 301 Neb. 437, 918 N.W.2d 834 (2018) (interpreting adoption/paternity procedure and statutory framework)
- Anderson v. A & R Ag Spraying & Trucking, 306 Neb. 484, 946 N.W.2d 435 (2020) (rules for ascertaining legislative intent and plain-meaning statutory construction)
- E.M. v. Nebraska Dept. of Health & Human Servs., 306 Neb. 1, 944 N.W.2d 252 (2020) (requirement to give effect to all parts of a statute)
- Peterson v. Jacobitz, 29 Neb. App. 486, 955 N.W.2d 329 (Neb. Ct. App. 2021) (Court of Appeals reversed Buffalo County dismissal; held § 43-104.05(1) addresses venue and allowed transfer)