Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-207 (2026)
Inconvenient forum
✓ current as of July 2026
- (1) A court of this state which has jurisdiction under this chapter to make a child custody determination may decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time if it determines that it is an inconvenient forum under the circumstances and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum. The issue of inconvenient forum may be raised upon motion of a party, the court's own motion, or request of another court.
- (2) Before determining whether it is an inconvenient forum, a court of this state shall consider whether it is appropriate for a court of another state to exercise jurisdiction. For this purpose, the court shall allow the parties to submit information and shall consider all relevant factors, including:
- (a) Whether domestic violence has occurred and is likely to continue in the future and which state could best protect the parties and the child;
- (b) The length of time the child has resided outside this state;
- (c) The distance between the court in this state and the court in the state that would assume jurisdiction;
- (d) The relative financial circumstances of the parties;
- (e) Any agreement of the parties as to which state should assume jurisdiction;
- (f) The nature and location of the evidence required to resolve the pending litigation, including testimony of the child;
- (g) The ability of the court of each state to decide the issue expeditiously and the procedures necessary to present the evidence; and
- (h) The familiarity of the court of each state with the facts and issues in the pending litigation.
- (3) If a court of this state determines that it is an inconvenient forum and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum, it shall stay the proceedings upon condition that a child custody proceeding be promptly commenced in another designated state and may impose any other condition the court considers just and proper.
- (4) A court of this state may decline to exercise its jurisdiction under this chapter if a child custody determination is incidental to an action for divorce or another proceeding while still retaining jurisdiction over the divorce or other proceeding.
Laws, 2004, ch. 519, § 19, eff. 7/1/2004.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2014–2024 · leading case: Travis Strait v. Kristy Lorenz, 155 So. 3d 197 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015).
Travis Strait v. Kristy Lorenz, 155 So. 3d 197 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015). “Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-207 (1). The court that made the child-custody determination retains jurisdiction until: [A] court of this state determines that neither the child, nor the child and one parent, nor the child and a person acting as a parent have a significant connection…”
Elle Adams v. John Leon Rice, 196 So. 3d 1086 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016). “” Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-207 (1) (Rev.2013).”
Hersey v. Gratton, 136 So. 3d 1085 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-207(1) (Rev.2013).”
A.N. v. B.N., 203 So. 3d 1234 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016). “, the judgment divorcing the child’s parents], this Court defers to the jurisdiction and decision regarding child custody, support, and visitation of the Alabama Court under [Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-207 1 ] convenient and more appropriate forum analysis as authorized in the…”
In the Interest of C.B.W. & C.B.W. v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2024). “32Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-207. 22 attacking the parentage findings in the Agreed Decree.”
Marcus McGrew v. Valerie McGrew (Miss. Ct. App. 2020). “Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-207 (2)(a)-(h). ¶12.”
Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-207(1): 2 cases
Travis Strait v. Kristy Lorenz, 155 So. 3d 197 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015). “Miss. Code Ann. § 93-27-207 (1). The court that made the child-custody determination retains jurisdiction until: [A] court of this state determines that neither the child, nor the child and one parent, nor the child and a person acting as a parent have a significant connection…”
Hersey v. Gratton, 136 So. 3d 1085 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 93-27-207(1) (Rev.2013).”
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.