Newcomb v. Newcomb, 87-728
| Decision Date | 05 May 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-728,87-728 |
| Citation | 507 So.2d 1145,12 Fla. L. Weekly 1154 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1154 Sharon G. NEWCOMB, Appellant, v. Stephen C. NEWCOMB, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Richard F. Hayes and Judith H. Hayes, for appellant.
Susan R. Cohen, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HENDRY and FERGUSON, JJ.
In 1986, the parties obtained a divorce in California where they were living at the time. The mother, who had primary custody of the parties' minor child, and the minor child subsequently moved to Florida. Five months later the father filed an action in California seeking a change of child custody. Six months after the move to Florida, while the father's action was pending, the mother brought an action in this state seeking, obviously, protection from the father's California action. We disagree with the trial court's determination that it was without jurisdiction to hear the mother's petition. Florida was the home state of the minor child when the custodial mother filed the Florida petition; therefore, Florida had jurisdiction to determine whether the California court, which also had jurisdiction, was exercising jurisdiction "substantially in conformity" with the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act. § 61.1314(1), Fla.Stat. (1985); Hickey v. Baxter, 461 So.2d 1364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Greene v. Greene, 432 So.2d 62 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Hernandez v. Hernandez, 406 So.2d 513 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); see also Al-Fassi v. Al-Fassi, 433 So.2d 664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 446 So.2d 99 (Fla.1984); Bonis v. Bonis, 420 So.2d 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied, 430 So.2d 450 (Fla.1983).
Reversed and remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chaddick v. Monopoli
...by petitioner in this cause and ruled against her. Under Dusesoi, she had her bite of the apple. The dissent cites Newcomb v. Newcomb, 507 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), in support of its position that Florida courts have jurisdiction to determine if a foreign court is exercising jurisdicti......
-
Siegel v. Siegel
...exercising its jurisdiction, which directly conflicts with the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal in Newcomb v. Newcomb, 507 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). We reject this argument. In Newcomb, the Third District Court of Appeal concluded that Florida was the home state of the mi......
-
Alvarez v. Alvarez
...which states have concurrent jurisdiction under the Act. See, e.g., Worth v. Worth, 554 So.2d 586 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Newcomb v. Newcomb, 507 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); see also Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act § 3, 9 U.L.A. 144 (1968). 2 A major goal of the Act is to eliminate ju......
-
Worth v. Worth, 89-854
...in both Ohio and Florida, we reverse the trial court's order determining that it had exclusive jurisdiction. See Newcomb v. Newcomb, 507 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Hickey v. Baxter, 461 So.2d 1364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); § 61.1308, Fla.Stat. (1987). Future motions should be considered unde......