Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 822.03 (2026)
Proceedings governed by other law
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
822.03822.03 Proceedings governed by other law. This chapter does not govern a proceeding pertaining to the authorization of emergency medical care for a child.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases, 1979–2007 · leading case: Tammie J.C. v. Robert T.R., 2003 WI 61 (Wis. 2003).
Tammie J.C. v. Robert T.R., 2003 WI 61 (Wis. 2003). “Wis. Stat. § 822.03 (1). ¶ 55. The third factor under Asahi is the plaintiff's interest in obtaining relief.”
Mayer v. Mayer, 283 N.W.2d 591 (Wis. Ct. App. 1979). “28 Commissioners’ Note to UCCJA §3 [§822.03, Stats.], reprinted in 9 U.L.A. at 107 (West, 1973.”
In Interest of AEH, 468 N.W.2d 190 (Wis. 1991). “In other words, all petitions for modification are to be addressed to the prior state if that state has sufficient contact with the case to satisfy section 3 [sec. 822.03, Stats.J. The fact that the court had previously considered the case may be one factor favoring its…”
In Re Marriage of Davidson v. Davidson, 485 N.W.2d 450 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “First, the court looks to section three of the Act [sec. 822.03, Stats.] to determine whether it has jurisdiction.”
In Interest of JT, 485 N.W.2d 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “See sec. 822.03(1)(a), Stats. In addition, the children and their mother had a significant connection with Arizona and evidence concerning their care, protection and training could be found in that state.”
P.C. v. C.C., 468 N.W.2d 190 (Wis. 1991). “In other words, all petitions for modification are to be addressed to the prior state if that state has sufficient contact with the case to satisfy section 3 [sec. 822.03, Stats.]. The fact that the court had previously considered the case may be one factor favoring its…”
Dragoo v. Dragoo, 298 N.W.2d 231 (Wis. Ct. App. 1980). “After several hearings and motions, the trial court, in August 1979, ruled that the jurisdictional standards of sec. 822.03, Stats., Wisconsin’s codification of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, were not satisfied and dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter…”
In re Marriage of Wiseman, 737 N.E.2d 325 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). “Wis. Stat. Ann. § 822.03 (l)(a) (West 1994).”
In Re Custody of Kalbes, 2007 WI App 136 (Wis. Ct. App. 2007). “Wis. Stat. § 822.03 (1) (2003-04); see also Kelly Gaines Stoner, The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction & *221 Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) — A Metamorphosis of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), 75 N.”
In Re Marriage of Michalik v. Michalik, 476 N.W.2d 586 (Wis. Ct. App. 1991). “" Section 822.03(1), Stats. 4 28 U.S.C. § 1738A(g) provides: A court of a State shall not exercise jurisdiction in any proceeding for a custody determination commenced during the pendency of a proceeding in a court of another State where such court of that other State is…”
Paula M. S. v. Neal A. R., 593 N.W.2d 486 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999). “First, the court determines whether it has subject matter jurisdiction under § 822.03, Stats. Id. If it does, then it determines whether a custody proceeding is also pending in another state which has subject *86 matter jurisdiction under the UCCJA too.”
State of Louisiana Ex Rel. Eaton v. Leis, 354 N.W.2d 209 (Wis. Ct. App. 1984). “Section 822.03(1), Stats., part of Wisconsin's enactment of the UCCJA, is nearly identical to La.”
— Wis. Stat. § 822.03(1) — 14 cases
Mayer v. Mayer, 283 N.W.2d 591 (Wis. Ct. App. 1979). “28 Commissioners’ Note to UCCJA §3 [§822.03, Stats.], reprinted in 9 U.L.A. at 107 (West, 1973.”
In Interest of AEH, 468 N.W.2d 190 (Wis. 1991). “In other words, all petitions for modification are to be addressed to the prior state if that state has sufficient contact with the case to satisfy section 3 [sec. 822.03, Stats.J. The fact that the court had previously considered the case may be one factor favoring its…”
In Re Marriage of Michalik v. Michalik, 476 N.W.2d 586 (Wis. Ct. App. 1991). “" Section 822.03(1), Stats. 4 28 U.S.C. § 1738A(g) provides: A court of a State shall not exercise jurisdiction in any proceeding for a custody determination commenced during the pendency of a proceeding in a court of another State where such court of that other State is…”
In Re Marriage of Davidson v. Davidson, 485 N.W.2d 450 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “First, the court looks to section three of the Act [sec. 822.03, Stats.] to determine whether it has jurisdiction.”
State of Louisiana Ex Rel. Eaton v. Leis, 354 N.W.2d 209 (Wis. Ct. App. 1984). “Section 822.03(1), Stats., part of Wisconsin's enactment of the UCCJA, is nearly identical to La.”
— Wis. Stat. § 822.03(1)(a) — 5 cases
In Interest of AEH, 468 N.W.2d 190 (Wis. 1991). “In other words, all petitions for modification are to be addressed to the prior state if that state has sufficient contact with the case to satisfy section 3 [sec. 822.03, Stats.J. The fact that the court had previously considered the case may be one factor favoring its…”
In Re Marriage of Davidson v. Davidson, 485 N.W.2d 450 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “First, the court looks to section three of the Act [sec. 822.03, Stats.] to determine whether it has jurisdiction.”
In Interest of JT, 485 N.W.2d 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “See sec. 822.03(1)(a), Stats. In addition, the children and their mother had a significant connection with Arizona and evidence concerning their care, protection and training could be found in that state.”
P.C. v. C.C., 448 N.W.2d 662 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989).
In Interest of AEH, 448 N.W.2d 662 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989).
— Wis. Stat. § 822.03(1)(b) — 4 cases
In Interest of AEH, 468 N.W.2d 190 (Wis. 1991). “In other words, all petitions for modification are to be addressed to the prior state if that state has sufficient contact with the case to satisfy section 3 [sec. 822.03, Stats.J. The fact that the court had previously considered the case may be one factor favoring its…”
In Re Marriage of Davidson v. Davidson, 485 N.W.2d 450 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “First, the court looks to section three of the Act [sec. 822.03, Stats.] to determine whether it has jurisdiction.”
In Interest of JT, 485 N.W.2d 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “See sec. 822.03(1)(a), Stats. In addition, the children and their mother had a significant connection with Arizona and evidence concerning their care, protection and training could be found in that state.”
P.C. v. C.C., 468 N.W.2d 190 (Wis. 1991). “In other words, all petitions for modification are to be addressed to the prior state if that state has sufficient contact with the case to satisfy section 3 [sec. 822.03, Stats.]. The fact that the court had previously considered the case may be one factor favoring its…”
— Wis. Stat. § 822.03(1)(c) — 2 cases
In Interest of JT, 485 N.W.2d 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “See sec. 822.03(1)(a), Stats. In addition, the children and their mother had a significant connection with Arizona and evidence concerning their care, protection and training could be found in that state.”
In Interest of AEH, 448 N.W.2d 662 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989).
— Wis. Stat. § 822.03(1)(d) — 2 cases
In Interest of JT, 485 N.W.2d 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “See sec. 822.03(1)(a), Stats. In addition, the children and their mother had a significant connection with Arizona and evidence concerning their care, protection and training could be found in that state.”
In Re Marriage of Thompson, 384 N.W.2d 713 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986).
— Wis. Stat. § 822.03(l)(a) — 4 cases
In Re Marriage of Davidson v. Davidson, 485 N.W.2d 450 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “First, the court looks to section three of the Act [sec. 822.03, Stats.] to determine whether it has jurisdiction.”
P.C. v. C.C., 468 N.W.2d 190 (Wis. 1991). “In other words, all petitions for modification are to be addressed to the prior state if that state has sufficient contact with the case to satisfy section 3 [sec. 822.03, Stats.]. The fact that the court had previously considered the case may be one factor favoring its…”
In Re Marriage of Vause v. Vause, 409 N.W.2d 412 (Wis. Ct. App. 1987).
Larry R. W. v. Alan F. S., 537 N.W.2d 30 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995).
— Wis. Stat. § 822.03(l)(b) — 2 cases
In Re Marriage of Davidson v. Davidson, 485 N.W.2d 450 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “First, the court looks to section three of the Act [sec. 822.03, Stats.] to determine whether it has jurisdiction.”
P.C. v. C.C., 468 N.W.2d 190 (Wis. 1991). “In other words, all petitions for modification are to be addressed to the prior state if that state has sufficient contact with the case to satisfy section 3 [sec. 822.03, Stats.]. The fact that the court had previously considered the case may be one factor favoring its…”
— Wis. Stat. § 822.03(l)(c) — 3 cases
P.C. v. C.C., 468 N.W.2d 190 (Wis. 1991). “In other words, all petitions for modification are to be addressed to the prior state if that state has sufficient contact with the case to satisfy section 3 [sec. 822.03, Stats.]. The fact that the court had previously considered the case may be one factor favoring its…”
In Interest of JT, 485 N.W.2d 70 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “See sec. 822.03(1)(a), Stats. In addition, the children and their mother had a significant connection with Arizona and evidence concerning their care, protection and training could be found in that state.”
P.C. v. C.C., 448 N.W.2d 662 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989).
— Wis. Stat. § 822.03(l)(d) — 2 cases
In Re Marriage of Davidson v. Davidson, 485 N.W.2d 450 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “First, the court looks to section three of the Act [sec. 822.03, Stats.] to determine whether it has jurisdiction.”
In Re Marriage of Thompson, 384 N.W.2d 713 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986).
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.