History:
L. 1978, ch. 231, § 3; L. 1983, ch. 140, § 11; Repealed, L. 2000, ch. 171, § 84; July 1.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Cited in finding continuing exclusive jurisdiction in divorce proceedings in district court which first obtains jurisdiction. Nixon v. Nixon, 226 Kan. 218, 220, 596 P.2d 1238.
2. Applied; no emergency or abandonment found which would justify assumption of jurisdiction under subsection (a)(3) or (4). Beebe v. Chavez, 226 Kan. 591, 599, 602 P.2d 1279.
3. Mentioned; parent in deprived child action is a party to the action and has right of access to the court's social file. Nunn v. Morrison, 227 Kan. 730, 734, 608 P.2d 1359.
4. District court has jurisdiction where one of the parties and child or children meet provisions of statute even though another state is "home state" under K.S.A. 38-1302(e). Larsen v. Larsen, 5 Kan. App. 2d 284, 286, 287, 615 P.2d 806.
5. Due diligence to attempt to locate parent before service by publication may be used to sever parental rights; if parent located publication service may not be used. In re Woodard, 231 Kan. 544, 548, 549, 550, 646 P.2d 1105 (1982).
6. Cited in affirming trial court's acceptance of jurisdiction in child custody matter; Kansas was home state of child. Guye v. Guye, 8 Kan. App. 2d 219, 221, 654 P.2d 482 (1982).
7. Occasional visitation by child not significant connection with this state sufficient to establish jurisdiction for change in custody; dissent. Bills v. Murdock, 232 Kan. 237, 238, 240, 241, 242, 243, 247, 248, 251, 252, 253, 654 P.2d 406 (1982).
8. Purpose of act is to limit jurisdiction, not expand it; no jurisdiction where parties reside elsewhere. Hart v. Hart, 236 Kan. 856, 858, 695 P.2d 1285 (1985).
9. Avoiding interstate jurisdictional disputes and promoting child's best interests among purposes of UCCJA. In re Wicks, 10 Kan. App. 2d 124, 126, 693 P.2d 481 (1985).
10. Cited; lack of subject matter jurisdiction in act to adjudicate child support or other monetary obligation noted. Warwick v. Gluck, 12 Kan. App. 2d 563, 566, 751 P.2d 1042 (1988).
11. Cited; jurisdictional issue where parent brought children to Kansas from France six months prior to proceedings examined. In re Marriage of Nasica, 12 Kan. App. 2d 794, 795, 758 P.2d 240 (1988).
12. Exclusive jurisdiction of initial court and limitations on Kansas jurisdiction examined where another state previously issued valid decree. In re Marriage of Mosier, 251 Kan. 490, 491, 836 P.2d 1158 (1992).
13. Act applicable to proceedings for termination of parental rights; jurisdictional conflict question examined. In re L.C., 18 Kan. App. 2d 627, 630, 857 P.2d 1375 (1993).
14. Whether the UCCJA (K.S.A. 38-1301 et seq.) is applicable to an initial determination of child custody in divorce proceeding pursuant to K.S.A. 60-1610 examined. In re Marriage of Harris, 20 Kan. App. 2d 50, 53, 58, 883 P.2d 785 (1994).
15. Post judgment motions for reconsideration filed without challenging jurisdiction waived lack of personal jurisdiction defense. Carrington v. Unseld, 22 Kan. App. 2d 815, 818, 923 P.2d 1052 (1996).
16. Trial court refusal to exercise emergency jurisdiction to modify out-of-state custody decree affirmed. In re Marriage of Anderson, 25 Kan. App. 2d 754, 755, 757, 969 P.2d 913 (1998).
Bills v. Murdock, 654 P.2d 406 (Kan. 1982). · cites it 18דThe court also found that it had jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303( a )(2) because (1) it is in the best interests of the child that the Kansas court take jurisdiction and decide the case without further delay, (2) the father lives in Kansas and has significant connections with…”
Murphy v. Woerner, 748 P.2d 749 (Alaska 1988). · cites it 7דKan.Stat.Ann. § 38-1303(a) (1986) provides in part: A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: (1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time…”
In Re the Marriage of Mosier, 836 P.2d 1158 (Kan. 1992). · cites it 9דThe petition alleged that Kansas was vested with jurisdiction pursuant to K.S.A. 38-1303, as Kansas was the “home state” of the child as defined in K.”
In the Interest of Woodard, 646 P.2d 1105 (Kan. 1982). · cites it 4ד; KSA 38-1303, 1979 Supp.; KSA 38-1305, 1979 Supp.”
S.W. v. Duncan, 2001 OK 39 (Okla. 2001). · cites it 2דOklahoma under the "home state" section (K.S.A.38-1303(a)(1)) and Kansas under the "significant connection" section (K.”
Arbogast v. Arbogast, 327 S.E.2d 675 (W. Va. 1984). · cites it 3דK.S.A. 38-1303 [1979], provided: "(a) A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: “(1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time of…”
In Re Marriage of Anderson, 969 P.2d 913 (Kan. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4דThe court further declined to exercise emergency jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303. Delora appeals. *756 Delora’s first argument on appeal is that the district court’s determination that it lacked jurisdiction under 38-1314 was not supported by substantial competent evidence.”
In Re the Adoption of Baby Girl B., 867 P.2d 1074 (Kan. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2דThe jurisdiction provision of the UCCJA is K.S.A. 38-1303, which provides in part: “(a) A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: *289 (1) This state (A)…”
In the Interest of E.T., 137 P.3d 1035 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2ד38-1348(a)(2), required that the child and at least one parent have a “significant connection” with Kansas. In that case, approximately 2 weeks before the child’s birth, the mother moved to Kansas to live with her uncle who became her legal guardian.”
Larsen v. Larsen, 615 P.2d 806 (Kan. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2ד60-1610(a) must now be considered in conjunction with the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 38-1303, which provides in pertinent part: “(a) A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody…”
Beebe v. Chavez, 602 P.2d 1279 (Kan. 1979). · cites it 2דK.S.A. 1978 Supp. 38-1303( a )(3) and (4).”
Hart v. Hart, 695 P.2d 1285 (Kan. 1985). · cites it 4דK.S.A. 1984 Supp. 38-1303 states a Kansas court may assert jurisdiction over child custody modifications when: “(1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time of commencement of the proceeding, or (B) had been the child’s home state within six months before…”
Bills v. Murdock, 654 P.2d 406 (Kan. 1982). “The court also found that it had jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303( a )(2) because (1) it is in the best interests of the child that the Kansas court take jurisdiction and decide the case without further delay, (2) the father lives in Kansas and has significant connections with…”
Murphy v. Woerner, 748 P.2d 749 (Alaska 1988). “Kan.Stat.Ann. § 38-1303(a) (1986) provides in part: A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: (1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time…”
In Re the Marriage of Mosier, 836 P.2d 1158 (Kan. 1992). “The petition alleged that Kansas was vested with jurisdiction pursuant to K.S.A. 38-1303, as Kansas was the “home state” of the child as defined in K.”
S.W. v. Duncan, 2001 OK 39 (Okla. 2001). “Oklahoma under the "home state" section (K.S.A.38-1303(a)(1)) and Kansas under the "significant connection" section (K.”
In Re the Adoption of Baby Girl B., 867 P.2d 1074 (Kan. Ct. App. 1994). “The jurisdiction provision of the UCCJA is K.S.A. 38-1303, which provides in part: “(a) A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: *289 (1) This state (A)…”
Bills v. Murdock, 654 P.2d 406 (Kan. 1982). “The court also found that it had jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303( a )(2) because (1) it is in the best interests of the child that the Kansas court take jurisdiction and decide the case without further delay, (2) the father lives in Kansas and has significant connections with…”
Murphy v. Woerner, 748 P.2d 749 (Alaska 1988). “Kan.Stat.Ann. § 38-1303(a) (1986) provides in part: A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: (1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time…”
In the Interest of E.T., 137 P.3d 1035 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “38-1348(a)(2), required that the child and at least one parent have a “significant connection” with Kansas. In that case, approximately 2 weeks before the child’s birth, the mother moved to Kansas to live with her uncle who became her legal guardian.”
S.W. v. Duncan, 2001 OK 39 (Okla. 2001). “Oklahoma under the "home state" section (K.S.A.38-1303(a)(1)) and Kansas under the "significant connection" section (K.”
Bills v. Murdock, 654 P.2d 406 (Kan. 1982). “The court also found that it had jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303( a )(2) because (1) it is in the best interests of the child that the Kansas court take jurisdiction and decide the case without further delay, (2) the father lives in Kansas and has significant connections with…”
Arbogast v. Arbogast, 327 S.E.2d 675 (W. Va. 1984). “K.S.A. 38-1303 [1979], provided: "(a) A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: “(1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time of…”
— K.S.A. § 38-1303(a)(3) — 5 cases
In Re Marriage of Anderson, 969 P.2d 913 (Kan. Ct. App. 1998). “The court further declined to exercise emergency jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303. Delora appeals. *756 Delora’s first argument on appeal is that the district court’s determination that it lacked jurisdiction under 38-1314 was not supported by substantial competent evidence.”
In the Interest of Woodard, 646 P.2d 1105 (Kan. 1982). “; KSA 38-1303, 1979 Supp.; KSA 38-1305, 1979 Supp.”
Bills v. Murdock, 654 P.2d 406 (Kan. 1982). “The court also found that it had jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303( a )(2) because (1) it is in the best interests of the child that the Kansas court take jurisdiction and decide the case without further delay, (2) the father lives in Kansas and has significant connections with…”
Murphy v. Woerner, 748 P.2d 749 (Alaska 1988). “Kan.Stat.Ann. § 38-1303(a) (1986) provides in part: A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: (1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time…”
Arbogast v. Arbogast, 327 S.E.2d 675 (W. Va. 1984). “K.S.A. 38-1303 [1979], provided: "(a) A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: “(1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time of…”
Bills v. Murdock, 654 P.2d 406 (Kan. 1982). “The court also found that it had jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303( a )(2) because (1) it is in the best interests of the child that the Kansas court take jurisdiction and decide the case without further delay, (2) the father lives in Kansas and has significant connections with…”
Hart v. Hart, 695 P.2d 1285 (Kan. 1985). “K.S.A. 1984 Supp. 38-1303 states a Kansas court may assert jurisdiction over child custody modifications when: “(1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time of commencement of the proceeding, or (B) had been the child’s home state within six months before…”
— K.S.A. § 38-1303(b) — 1 case
Bills v. Murdock, 654 P.2d 406 (Kan. 1982). “The court also found that it had jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303( a )(2) because (1) it is in the best interests of the child that the Kansas court take jurisdiction and decide the case without further delay, (2) the father lives in Kansas and has significant connections with…”
— K.S.A. § 38-1303(c)(2) — 1 case
Bills v. Murdock, 654 P.2d 406 (Kan. 1982). “The court also found that it had jurisdiction under K.S.A. 38-1303( a )(2) because (1) it is in the best interests of the child that the Kansas court take jurisdiction and decide the case without further delay, (2) the father lives in Kansas and has significant connections with…”
— K.S.A. § 38-1303(o)(3) — 1 case
Beebe v. Chavez, 602 P.2d 1279 (Kan. 1979). “K.S.A. 1978 Supp. 38-1303( a )(3) and (4).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.