White v. Harper
2011 Iowa App. LEXIS 994
| Iowa Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Child custody dispute: Tennessee order awarded joint custody to Harper and Harper's mother McMinn; White seeks Iowa custody/modification.
- Iowa petition filed Nov 6, 2009 seeking custody and support, alleging child resided in Iowa and requesting TRO.
- Iowa district court previously ordered evidentiary hearing on jurisdiction but did not receive evidence; McMinn argued lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
- Judge Darbyshire ruled Iowa had jurisdiction based on contacts, but did not allow evidence and denied McMinn participation; guardian ad litem for child not appointed.
- Court remands for evidentiary hearing on jurisdiction and orders guardian ad litem appointment; vacates January 11, 2010 order and does not retain jurisdiction.
- Court notes Tennessee proceedings and neglect findings; emphasizes child’s best interests and need for guardian ad litem; indicates future proceedings will reassess jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Iowa has subject matter jurisdiction to modify a Tennessee custody order. | McMinn contends Iowa lacks initial-determination jurisdiction. | White contends Iowa has jurisdiction under UCCJEA based on home-state or significant-connection criteria. | Remand for evidentiary hearing; jurisdiction not established |
| Whether a guardian ad litem should have been appointed for the child. | McMinn argues for guardian ad litem due to neglect findings. | White and others did not oppose guardian appointment for the child. | Guardian ad litem required; case remanded for appointment |
| Whether McMinn had a meaningful opportunity to participate in the jurisdiction hearing. | McMinn sought participation and due process rights. | Proceedings proceeded with limited participant presence; telephonic appearance allowed. | McMinn’s participation not adequately ensured; remand to allow hearing with full opportunity to be heard |
| Whether the court should consider whether the Tennessee neglect/dependency finding affects jurisdiction. | McMinn suggests juvenile-court analogies support different venue. | Not necessary to decide; focus remains on jurisdiction and guardian appointment. | Unnecessary to decide; guardian ad litem warranted and jurisdiction remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Guardianship of Deal-Burch, 759 N.W.2d 341 (Iowa Ct.App.2008) (standard for reviewing district court jurisdiction under UCCJEA)
- State ex rel. Buechler v. Vinsand, 318 N.W.2d 208 (Iowa 1982) (limits on appellate search beyond trial court ruling)
- Fenton v. Webb, 705 N.W.2d 323 (Iowa Ct.App.2005) (guardian ad litem considerations in custody disputes)
- In re Marriage of Courtade, 560 N.W.2d 36 (Iowa Ct.App.1996) (child's best interests; guardian ad litem may be appointed)
- Bowen v. Kaplan, 237 N.W.2d 799 (Iowa 1976) (courts not bound to search record for support; rely on appellant’s objections)
- Klinge v. Bentien, 725 N.W.2d 13 (Iowa 2006) (definition and scope of subject matter jurisdiction under statutes)