462 So. 2d 546 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 1985
Appellant seeks review of the denial of a motion to dismiss appellee’s request for modification of a child custody order. Because we find that the court should not have assumed jurisdiction pursuant to ap-pellee’s motion for modification, we grant review by certiorari
As adopted in Florida the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act governs the jurisdictional aspects of interstate custody disputes and establishes generally that the “home state” of the child should be the jurisdiction to hear and determine custody matters. See Hegler v. Hegler, 383 So.2d 1134 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); § 61.1308(l)(a), Florida Statutes. In the present case the parties’ factual allegations indicate that for the past four years Florida has not been the child’s “home .state,” as defined by § 61.1306(5), Florida Statutes.
Certiorari is granted, the order under review is quashed, and the cause remanded.
. While review is sought by appeal the order in question is non-final and is not encompassed within the limited exceptions in Fla.R.App.P. 9.130 for which interlocutory review by appeal
. Section 61.1306(5), Florida Statutes, defines "home state” as:
... the state in which the child, immediately preceding the time involved, lived with his parents, a parent, or a person acting as a parent for at least six consecutive months....
. In the order under review the court also noted that “there was, and is, pending, a Motion to Change Custody, upon which adjudication was deferred in 1979.” The record before us contains no other reference to such a motion, and neither the court nor the parties treated appellant’s present motion for modification as an attempted amendment of the prior motion. The asserted pendency of such prior motion, the propriety of which we do not address, thus does not impact appellant’s present motion or the order now under review.