Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202 (2026)

Exclusive, continuing jurisdiction

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Laws, 2004, ch. 519, § 14, eff. 7/1/2004.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2008–2024 · leading case: In re the Adoption of H.C.H., 304 P.3d 1271 (Kan. 2013).
In re the Adoption of H.C.H., 304 P.3d 1271 (Kan. 2013). · cites it 3× “23-37,202; Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202 (Rev. 2004; 2012 Supp.”
White v. White, 26 So. 3d 342 (Miss. 2010). · cites it 2× “Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-202 ¶ 14. Vicki argued in her motion to dismiss and at the hearing on the matter that the Chancery Court of Tishomingo County lacked jurisdiction under Mississippi Code Section 93-27-202.”
Travis Strait v. Kristy Lorenz, 155 So. 3d 197 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015). “] Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-202 (Rev. 2013). No such determination regarding lack of jurisdiction was made in this case.”
Elle A. Adams v. John Leon Rice, 249 So. 3d 463 (Miss. Ct. App. 2018). “(citing Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202 (1) (Rev. 2013) ).”
Yeager v. Kittrell, 35 So. 3d 1221 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-202(l)(a). Only the issuing state may make this determination.”
In the Interest of C.B.W. & C.B.W. v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2024). · cites it 4× “203 (Jurisdiction to Modify Determination), with Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202 (Exclusive Continuing Jurisdiction) and 93-207-203 (Jurisdiction to Modify Determination).”
Vicki D. White v. John R. White (Miss. 2008). · cites it 2× “Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202 ¶14. Vicki argued in her motion to dismiss and at the hearing on the matter that the Chancery Court of Tishomingo County lacked jurisdiction under Mississippi Code Section 93-27-202.”
Amber Nicole Hewlett Brown v. James Edwin Hewlett, III (Miss. Ct. App. 2019). “Brown’s final argument is that the chancellor erred by awarding Hewlett attorney’s fees without requiring an “itemized statement” from his attorney or “accompanying 6 On appeal, Brown does not argue that the chancery court ever lost jurisdiction pursuant to the UCCJEA or for any…”
Michelle Pope v. Daniel Fountain (Miss. Ct. App. 2019). “Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202 (Rev. 2018). Additionally, although Martin may no longer live in George County, Martin appeared as a witness at the May 22, 2017 paternity hearing, suggesting his ability to attend and participate in this action’s proceedings.”
David G. Daigle Versus Katherine A. Daigle (La. Ct. App. 2022). “Miss. Code Ann. §93-27-202 is nearly identical to La.”
Rose v. Upshaw, 69 So. 3d 74 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011). “See also Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-202(l)(b) (Supp. 2010) (giving the issuing state “exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over the determination until: .”
Swain v. McIntosh, 18 F. Supp. 3d 799 (S.D. Miss. 2013). “§ 93-11-65(1); and once such court “has made a child custody determination [such court] has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over the determination,” Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-202. This *802 principle was recognized by the Mississippi Supreme Court in Ladner v.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202(1) — 1 case
In the Interest of C.B.W. & C.B.W. v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2024). “203 (Jurisdiction to Modify Determination), with Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202 (Exclusive Continuing Jurisdiction) and 93-207-203 (Jurisdiction to Modify Determination).”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202(l)(a) — 1 case
Yeager v. Kittrell, 35 So. 3d 1221 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-202(l)(a). Only the issuing state may make this determination.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-202(l)(b) — 1 case
Rose v. Upshaw, 69 So. 3d 74 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011). “See also Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-202(l)(b) (Supp. 2010) (giving the issuing state “exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over the determination until: .”
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.