Brown v. Tobyne
| Decision Date | 14 April 1980 |
| Citation | 402 N.E.2d 1097,9 Mass.App.Ct. 897 |
| Parties | Coleen BROWN v. Gerald E. TOBYNE. |
| Court | Appeals Court of Massachusetts |
Mark I. Zarrow, Worcester, for plaintiff.
Diane F. Paulson, Worcester, for defendant.
Before HALE, C. J., and GRANT and NOLAN, JJ.
RESCRIPT.
There was no error in the judge's allowance of the defendant's motion to dismiss.
The defendant had been awarded "permanent" custody of his two children on January 3, 1980, by the Superior Court of Coos County, New Hampshire, where the children had been living with the defendant, their father, since the summer of 1978. At that time, the plaintiff, the children's mother, with whom they had formerly been living in Massachusetts, voluntarily surrendered the children to the defendant because of the onset of a "nervous breakdown." The plaintiff had taken the children to Massachusetts on December 25, 1978, for a visit with the consent of the defendant. On January 7, 1980, the plaintiff was awarded temporary custody of the children by the Probate Court for Worcester County. This order was revoked on January 14, 1980, when the defendant's motion to dismiss was allowed.
The only colorable ground among those asserted in the motion to dismiss was the lack of subject matter jurisdiction under G.L. c. 208, § 29 (). See Mass.R.Dom.Rel.P. 12(b)(1) (1975). The interposition of a motion to dismiss on this ground imposed on the plaintiff the burden of proving the facts on which the jurisdiction of the court depended. Thomson v. Gaskill, 315 U.S. 442, 446, 62 S.Ct. 673, 675, 86 L.Ed.2d 951 (1942). Compare Droukas v. Divers Training Academy, Inc., 375 Mass. ---, ---, --- a, 376 N.E.2d 548 (1978); Nichols Associates, Inc. v. Starr, 4 Mass.App. 91, 93, 341 N.E.2d 909 (1976). The record is bare of any such proof.
Judgment affirmed.
a. Mass.Adv.Sh. (1978) 1175, 1176.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pishev v. City of Somerville
...MacKenzie, 66 Mass. App. Ct. 836, 837 n.5, 851 N.E.2d 455 (2006), S.C., 449 Mass. 832, 874 N.E.2d 1084 (2007) ; Brown v. Tobyne, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 897, 898, 402 N.E.2d 1097 (1980). When deciding a rule 12(b)(1) motion, a judge may consider documents and materials that are outside the pleadin......
-
Hiles v. Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts
...fell to Hiles to prove jurisdictional facts. See Williams v. Episcopal Diocese of Mass., 436 Mass. 574, 577 n.2 (2002); Brown v. Tobyne, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 897, 898 (1980). Under this "factual challenge" to jurisdiction, "the plaintiff's jurisdictional averments [in the complaint] are entitle......
-
Brown v. Tobyne
...Judicial Court (--- MASS. --- , --- N.E.2D ----A (1980), we have reconsidered our earlier holding in this case (--- Mass.App. --- b), 402 N.E.2d 1097 (1980), in the light of the court's decision in Murphy v. Murphy, --- Mass. --- c, 404 N.E.2d 69 (1980). The defendant's motion under Mass.R.......
-
Caffyn v. Caffyn
...to prove jurisdictional facts. Williams v. Episcopal Diocese of Mass., 436 Mass. 574, 577 n.2 (2002), and cases cited. See Brown v. Tobyne, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 897 (1980). At the time she filed the complaint for divorce, the wife had not yet satisfied the one-year residency requirement, and th......