New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Domestic Relations Law § 76 (2026)

Initial child custody jurisdiction

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 76. Initial child custody jurisdiction. 1. Except as otherwise
provided in section seventy-six-c of this title, a court of this state
has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if:
  (a) this state is the home state of the child on the date of the
commencement of the proceeding, or was the home state of the child
within six months before the commencement of the proceeding and the
child is absent from this state but a parent or person acting as a
parent continues to live in this state;
  (b) a court of another state does not have jurisdiction under
paragraph (a) of this subdivision, or a court of the home state of the
child has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this
state is the more appropriate forum under section seventy-six-f or
seventy-six-g of this title, and:
  (i) the child and the child's parents, or the child and at least one
parent or a person acting as a parent, have a significant connection
with this state other than mere physical presence; and
  (ii) substantial evidence is available in this state concerning the
child's care, protection, training, and personal relationships;
  (c) all courts having jurisdiction under paragraph (a) or (b) of this
subdivision have declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a
court of this state is the more appropriate forum to determine the
custody of the child under section seventy-six-f or seventy-six-g of
this title; or
  (d) no court of any other state would have jurisdiction under the
criteria specified in paragraph (a), (b) or (c) of this subdivision.
  2. Subdivision one of this section is the exclusive jurisdictional
basis for making a child custody determination by a court of this state.
  3. Physical presence of, or personal jurisdiction over, a party or a
child is not necessary or sufficient to make a child custody
determination.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 144 cases (38 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: In re Destiny EE., 90 A.D.3d 1437 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In re Destiny EE., 90 A.D.3d 1437 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). · cites it 7× “or *1440 initial child custody jurisdiction, including, among others, that “this state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was the home state of the child within six months before the commencement of the proceeding and the child…”

Breselor v. Arciniega, 123 A.D.3d 1413 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). · cites it 5× “The UCCJEA provides the jurisdictional grounds for a court of this state to hear an initial custody dispute, 1 including when “this state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was the home state of the child within six months before…”

Christine L. v. Jason L., 23 Misc. 3d 1039 (N.Y.C. Fam. Ct. 2009). · cites it 17× “New York has adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) which addresses obtaining and enforcing orders of custody and visitation across state lines (see Domestic Relations Law § 75). Domestic Relations Law § 76 (1) specifies when New York may…”

Matter of Mark B. v. Tameka D., 2020 NY Slip Op 2833 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020). · cites it 8× “The UCCJEA delineates four situations in which a state's courts can have jurisdiction to entertain an initial custody proceeding ( see Domestic Relations Law § 76 [1]). The UCCJEA operates like a flowchart, where, if jurisdiction is proper under a prescribed situation, the…”

Joseph II. v. Luisa JJ., 2021 NY Slip Op 06586 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021). · cites it 4× “[FN4] Under the UCCJEA, "a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if" one of four statutorily prescribed situations apply (Domestic Relations Law § 76 [1]). "The UCCJEA operates like a flowchart, where, if jurisdiction is proper…”

Hector G. v. Josefina P., 2 Misc. 3d 801 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2003). · cites it 4× “” This multilayered analysis, rather like a hall of mirrors, immediately refers the inquirer back to the provision governing *815 initial child custody determinations, Domestic Relations Law §76 (1) (a) or (b).”

Greenidge v. Greenidge, 16 A.D.3d 583 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005). · cites it 3× “The Family Court did not have “jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination” pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 76, because the children and their mother had lived in Pennsylvania for approximately four years, the Pennsylvania courts would have jurisdiction over…”

Krymko v. Krymko, 32 A.D.3d 941 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006). · cites it 3× “” The mother argues that New York was not Chava’s home state because Chava only resided here between July 28, 2004 and January 10, 2005, which is less than six months (see Domestic Relations Law § 75-a [7]). The father argues, inter alia, that Chava resided in New York for over…”

Michael McC. v. Manuela A., 48 A.D.3d 91 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). · cites it 2× “(See Domestic Relations Law § 76; see generally Sobie, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 14, Domestic Relations Law § 76, 2007 Pocket Part, at 114, Domestic Relations Law § 76-b, 2007 Pocket Part, at 149-150; see also Hector G.”

Zippo v. Zippo, 41 A.D.3d 915 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). · cites it 2× “Finally, although petitioner has submitted a copy of an order of the Superior Court of California issued shortly after respondent’s relocation there and holding that it had no jurisdiction to modify a New York custody order, we note that there is nothing in the California order…”

Arnold v. Harari, 4 A.D.3d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004). · cites it 2× “stablish initial child custody jurisdiction, including, among others, that “this state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was the home state of the child within six months before the commencement of the proceeding and the child…”

Matter of Eldad LL v. Dannai MM., 2017 NY Slip Op 8221 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). “The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (see Domestic Relations Law art 5-A) provides that a New York court has jurisdiction to make an initial custody determination only if, as relevant here, “[New York] is the home state of the child on the date of the…”

Show all 144 citing cases →

— N.Y. Domestic Relations Law § 76(1) — 2 cases

Matter of Noel D. v. Gladys D., 2005 NY Slip Op 50092(U) (N.Y. Fam. Ct., Queens Cty. 2005).

Matter of Peter M. v. Fezeka G.G., 2025 NY Slip Op 05573 (N.Y. App. Div. 2025).

— N.Y. Domestic Relations Law § 76(1)(a) — 2 cases

LeBoeuf v. Greene, 2023 NY Slip Op 02870 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023).

Matter of Sneed v. Campagn, 2022 NY Slip Op 07239 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022).

— N.Y. Domestic Relations Law § 76(1)(b) — 5 cases

Matter of Defrank v. Wolf, 2020 NY Slip Op 126 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020).

Matter of Aida T.M. v. Manuel R.T.M., 2021 NY Slip Op 04688 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021).

Matter of Nathaniel H. (Nathaniel H.--Dayalyn G.), 2023 NY Slip Op 00927 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023).

Matter of Ferreira v. Santiago, 2019 NY Slip Op 1409 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019).

— N.Y. Domestic Relations Law § 76(1)(b)(i) — 1 case

Matter of Noel D. v. Gladys D., 2005 NY Slip Op 50092(U) (N.Y. Fam. Ct., Queens Cty. 2005).

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.