Blazek v. Blazek

Citation462 N.Y.S.2d 557,119 Misc.2d 141
PartiesPaul BLAZEK, Petitioner, v. Jill E. BLAZEK, Respondent.
Decision Date03 May 1983
CourtNew York Family Court

John R. Lynch, Jr., Syracuse, for petitioner.

Stanley R. Germain, Fayetteville, for respondent.

DECISION AND ORDER

RAYMOND J. BARTH, Judge.

This matter was commenced by the filing of an Order to Show Cause and petition on August 20, 1982 wherein the Petitioner sought to modify the parties decree of divorce so as to grant him joint custody and specific rights of visitation with his children. The Respondent denied the allegations of the petition and later moved to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

The substantially agreed upon facts are as follows:

1) that the subject children were both born on January 12, 1977 and resided in New York State until July of 1981;

2) that the parties were divorced by decree of the Supreme Court of Onondaga County, State of New York, dated April 9, 1979 wherein the Respondent was awarded custody of the children and the Petitioner granted reasonable rights of visitation;

3) that in July of 1981 the Respondent moved with the children to Texas where they remained for approximately two months;

4) that in September of 1981 the Respondent moved with the children to Indiana where they reside to this date;

5) that the Petitioner has continuously resided in New York State throughout this period; and

6) that nearly all of the children's relatives reside within the State of New York.

The Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act of 1980 (P.K.P.A.; U.S.Code, tit. 28, section 1738A) has pre-empted State law with regard to the factors necessary before jurisdiction can be exercised in interstate custody matters. (Stafford v. Stacey, 115 Misc.2d 291, 453 N.Y.S.2d 992 (1982); Matter of Leslie L.F. v. Constance F., 110 Misc.2d 86, 441 N.Y.S.2d 911 (1981)).

Subsection (d) of the P.K.P.A. provides that "The jurisdiction of a court of a State which has made a child custody determination consistently with the provisions of this section continues as long as the requirement of subsection (c)(1) of this section continues to be met and such State remains the residence of the child or of any contestant". The Onondaga County Supreme Court made the custody determination consistently with the provisions of the P.K.P.A. and the Petitioner has remained a resident of the State of New York. Subsection (c)(1) requires a determination of whether this Court has jurisdiction in accordance with New York State laws.

Section 75-d of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (U.C.C.J.A.) provides the jurisdictional grounds upon which a New York Court may assume jurisdiction in an interstate custody matter. The only ground applicable herein is as follows: "1. A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree only when: (b) it is in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Marks v. Marks
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • December 6, 1983
    ...U.S. ----, 103 S.Ct. 1203, 75 L.Ed.2d 445 (1983); Flannery v. Stephenson, 416 So.2d 1034 (Ala.Civ.App.1982); Blazek v. Blazek, 119 Misc.2d 141, 462 N.Y.S.2d 557 (Fam.Ct.1983). For the reasons which follow, we hold that the Federal Act prevented the family court from modifying the July 14, 1......
  • Enslein v. Enslein
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • August 12, 1985
    ...Federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act of 1980 (PKPA) (28 U.S.C. § 1738A) pre-empts the UCCJA (28 U.S.C. § 1738A Blazek v. Blazek, 119 Misc.2d 141, 462 N.Y.S.2d 557; Hays v. Hays, 117 Misc.2d 541, 458 N.Y.S.2d 440; Stafford v. Stacey, 115 Misc.2d 291, 453 N.Y.S.2d 992). However, applyin......
  • Pauzner v. Pauzner
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • March 31, 1989
    ...state law with regard to the factors necessary before jurisdiction may be invoked in interstate custody matters. (Blazek v. Blazek, 119 Misc.2d 141, 462 N.Y.S.2d 557; Patricia R. v. Andrew W., 121 Misc.2d 103, 467 N.Y.S.2d 322; Farrell v. Farrell, 133 A.D.2d 530, 520 N.Y.S.2d Section 1738A(......
  • Diane Zwissler (nka Anderson) v. Charles D. Zwissler
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • March 13, 1998
    ...... factors from those set forth under the PKPA, the PKPA. preempts the state's UCCJA law. Blazek v. Blazek. (1983), 462 N.Y.S.2d 557. By preempting state laws that. conflict with the PKPA as to the factors that are necessary. ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT