Court Summaries

• Publication year: 2013
• Pages: 50
• Citation: Vol. 36 No. 2 Pg. 50

Court Summaries Vol. 36 No. 2 Pg. 50 Wyoming Bar Journal April 2013

P. Craig Silva Williams, Porter, Day & Neville P.C.

In the Interest of NC and AM v. State Department of Family Services

2013 WY 2

S-12-0139

January 9, 2013

This case considered the application and interpretation of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (hereinafter "UCCJEA"). In 2011, mother, SC, was living in Texas with her boyfriend, FC. She had two children, NC and AM, who were four and three years old, respectively. FC was not the biological father of the children. Grandmother, SR, resided in Cody, Wyoming. FC was investigated for abuse/neglect of the children by Texas authorities, but no action had been taken. Grandmother was concerned about continued abuse of the children; consequently, she brought the children to Wyoming, where she reported the abuse to the Wyoming Department of Family Services. An investigation was conducted, and neglect petitions were filed on behalf of both children. S.C. and FC appeared by phone at the initial appearance. SC's Texas attorney objected to the Court exercising jurisdiction over the children. At the hearing, DFS was granted legal and physical custody of the children, with physical placement with Grandmother. S.C. and FC were given court appointed counsel. Those attorneys moved to dismiss the petitions based on questions of subject matter jurisdiction. The argument was that the mother and her boyfriend resided outside of Wyoming, as did the children when the abuse occurred. Those motions were denied. Ultimately, the district court adjudicated the children as neglected. The court then ordered that the children remain with Grandmother until S.C. and FC met the case plan requirements of the court. S.C. and FC appealed. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for proceedings consistent with the Courts decision.

The case presents many novel issues under the UCCJEA. The first issue was whether the UCCJEA governs neglect petitions. The UCCJEA defines "child custody determination" to include any court order that deals with legal or physical custody or visitation. The petitions before the court were neglect petitions seeking temporary cus-tody orders. The children were Texas residents visiting Wyoming, a scenario that implicated two states' jurisdiction; therefore, the Court held that the UCCJEA was applicable. This finding is consistent with the goal of the UCCJEA to eliminate the simultaneous exercise of jurisdiction over custody disputes in more than one state. It follows, therefore, that the home state of Texas had jurisdiction under the UCCJEA, and that the only way the Wyoming Court could exercise jurisdiction was under the Act's emergency provisions.

The UCCJEA's emergency jurisdiction clause provides that:

A court of this state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, the child's sibling or a parent of the child is subjected to a or threatened with mistreatment or abuse.

Wyo. Stat. § 20-5-304(a) (Lexis 2011). Generally, a Wyoming court's exercise of emergency jurisdiction under UCCJEA does not depend on findings that the child is a resident of Wyoming or that the mistreatment, abuse or neglect occurred in Wyoming. Consequently, the Wyoming Supreme Court found the district court had properly exercised jurisdiction under this provision because the children were in Wyoming, and allegations and evidence of abuse and neglect were present.

The next question the Court addressed was whether under that provision, the children would be subject to abuse and neglect if returned to Texas. The UCCJEA does not define abuse and neglect. Consequently, the Wyoming Supreme Court looked to Wyoming state law for those definitions. The Court ruled that, based on the adjudicatory hearing, the district court was correct in concluding that these children were subject to abuse and neglect.

The final question the Court addressed was whether under the UCCJEA's emergency jurisdiction provision the district court exceeded its authority in determining custody. The Supreme Court found that it had done so, reversing the decision accordingly. Under the UCCJEA, the court does not have authority to make permanent custody determinations. Therefore, the Wyoming Supreme Court held that the district court treated, or entered an order treating, this case like a typical neglect abuse petition. In practice, the court could enter the shelter care...