Waldron v. Waldron
2015 WY 64
| Wyo. | 2015Background
- Father (Waldron) and Mother divorced in 2007; Mother had primary custody and Father visitation; in 2010 visitation was restricted to supervised visits after domestic-violence-related events.
- In 2011 Mother and the child moved to Pennsylvania; Mother later filed to terminate Father's parental rights in Pennsylvania.
- Father filed motions in Wyoming (contempt and to progress visitation) in November 2013; Mother asked Wyoming to defer to the Pennsylvania termination proceedings.
- Wyoming and Pennsylvania judges conferred under the UCCJEA; on March 18, 2014 the Wyoming court issued an order declining to exercise jurisdiction and ceded the matters to Pennsylvania.
- Father did not appeal that March 18 order within 30 days; instead he filed an “Objection” (March 25) seeking reconsideration and a hearing. The Wyoming court denied the objection on May 30.
- Father filed a notice of appeal from the May 30 denial on June 26, 2014. The Wyoming Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as untimely because the objection was a motion for reconsideration that did not toll the appeal deadline.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the March 18 Order declining jurisdiction was appealable | Waldron implied the order affected his rights and should be reviewable | Mother argued the court properly ceded jurisdiction and that any appeal period ran from March 18 | Court: The March 18 order was final and appealable; it resolved all outstanding issues in Wyoming |
| Whether Father’s March 25 “Objection” tolled the 30-day appeal period | Father argued he lacked notice/opportunity to be heard and sought a hearing; called it an objection | Mother characterized it as a mere motion for reconsideration that does not toll appeal deadlines | Court: The objection was a motion for reconsideration and did not toll the 30-day appeal period |
| Whether the objection could be treated as a tolling post-judgment motion (W.R.C.P. 50(b), 52(b), or 59) | Father contended he was entitled to have the court reconsider or explain its jurisdictional choice | Mother argued the pleading did not meet any rule's substantive requirements (no jury verdict, no requested factual findings, no basis for new-trial or Rule 59(e)) | Court: The objection did not qualify under Rule 50(b), 52(b), or 59(e); none tolled the appeal time |
| Whether Wyoming abused discretion in declining jurisdiction under the UCCJEA | Father suggested lack of notice and opportunity to submit information made the decision improper | Mother and the court relied on PA residency, existing PA proceedings, and convenience to decline jurisdiction | Court: Did not reach abuse-of-discretion merits because appeal was untimely; noted statutory procedures allow communication and submission of information but do not mandate an evidentiary hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- Plymale v. Donnelly, 125 P.3d 1022 (Wyo. 2006) (treating post-judgment motions for reconsideration as nullities and warning about tolling issues)
- Steranko v. Dunks, 199 P.3d 1096 (Wyo. 2009) (recognizing validity of pre-judgment motions to reconsider and distinguishing Plymale)
- In re Estate of Nielsen, 252 P.3d 958 (Wyo. 2011) (appellate jurisdiction and requirements for timely notice of appeal)
- Capshaw v. Osbon, 190 P.3d 156 (Wyo. 2008) (timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional)
- In re E.R.C.K., 314 P.3d 1170 (Wyo. 2013) (three-part test for appealable order: affects substantial right, determines merits, resolves outstanding issues)
- Symington v. Symington, 167 P.3d 658 (Wyo. 2007) (standard of review for declining/exercising jurisdiction under UCCJEA)