Wheeler v. District Court In and For City and County of Denver, No. 26459

Docket NºNo. 26459
Citation526 P.2d 658, 186 Colo. 218
Case DateSeptember 23, 1974
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

Page 658

526 P.2d 658
186 Colo. 218
Charles Wilson WHEELER, Petitioner,
v.
DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR the CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER and
the State of Colorado, and the Honorable Gilbert
A. Alexander, Judge of said Court, Respondents.
No. 26459.
Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.
Sept. 23, 1974.

[186 Colo. 219]

Page 659

Myrick & Newton, P.C., Barrie G. Sullivan, II, William E. Myrick, Denver, for petitioner.

James W. Creamer, Jr. & Associates, P.C., James W. Creamer, Jr., Mark A. Lambertson, Denver, for respondents.

DAY, Justice.

This is an original proceeding brought under C.A.R. 21. Petitioner Wheeler seeks a writ of mandamus to require the respondent court to conduct a hearing concerning custody of two children domiciled with him in Colorado. Proceedings in the lower court were held under Colo.Sess. Laws 1973, ch. 163, 46--6--1 et seq., at 556, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (hereinafter 'the Act'). The court, instead of conducting a hearing, made summary disposition, ruling that it had no jurisdiction but to honor the Illinois court decree. Because this is a new act and a matter of first impression as well as of great public importance, we issued a rule to show cause why the court should not reinstate the petition and conduct a hearing thereon. The answer has been made and the issues framed. We make the rule absolute.

I.

Petitioner Wheeler and Sandra Kay Wheeler were divorced in Illinois in January, 1969. The wife received custody of their three children. The custody decree was changed in July [186 Colo. 220] of 1969 and Wheeler was given custody. In early July, 1973 the Illinois court gave Wheeler permission to move his domicile and the children to Colorado, subject to visitation rights. On July 6, 1973, one day after Wheeler moved into this state, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act was approved.

In August, 1973 the Illinois court changed the custody of one child to the

Page 660

mother; the child has since been returned voluntarily to her. In November, 1973 the Illinois court in an ex parte proceeding again modified the custody decree, ordering return of the other two children to their mother in Illinois. She filed an action against Wheeler in Denver district court in March, 1974 to enforce the Illinois decree. Wheeler answered and filed a cross-petition for affirmation of custody in himself. The lower court dismissed his petition, construing section 46--6--6 of the Act to mean the Illinois court had continuing jurisdiction, although noting this was a 'classic example' of what the Act is designed to prevent.

II.

The Uniform...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 practice notes
  • Marquiss v. Marquiss, No. 90-184
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 7 Julio 1992
    ...Act accorded flexibility built around the children's "home state." Wheeler v. District Court In and For City and County of Denver, 186 Colo. 218, 526 P.2d 658 (1974); In re LeMond, 182 Ind.App. 626, 395 N.E.2d 1287 (1979); Brooks v. Brooks, 20 Or.App. 43, 530 P.2d 547 (1975); McAtee v. McAt......
  • Petition of Giblin, No. 45274
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • 18 Julio 1975
    ...the use of [304 MINN 521] maneuver of doubtful legality may place their clients at a decided disadvantage.' See Wheeler v. District Court, 526 P.2d 658, 660 (Colo.1974), also involving an Illinois court, and a situation not unlike the one before us, where, the court characterized the act as......
  • Spaulding v. Spaulding
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • 6 Junio 1983
    ...stated that the underlying purpose of the Act is to "eliminate jurisdictional fishing with children as bait." Wheeler v. District Court, 186 Colo. 218, 220, 526 P.2d 658, 660 (1974). It is imperative that we apply the provisions of this Act so as to further these policies. Page 1364 Recogni......
  • Cricenti v. Weiland, No. 96-P-1345
    • United States
    • Appeals Court of Massachusetts
    • 19 Mayo 1998
    ...one state, jurisdiction is determined" by sections other than the provision relating to pending proceedings.) See Wheeler v. Dist. Court, 186 Colo. 218, 221, 526 P.2d 658 Page 357 (1974); In re Neville, 136 Or.App. 403, 406, 901 P.2d 957 (1995); Quenzer v. Quenzer, 653 P.2d 295, 302 (Wyo.19......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
31 cases
  • Marquiss v. Marquiss, No. 90-184
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 7 Julio 1992
    ...Act accorded flexibility built around the children's "home state." Wheeler v. District Court In and For City and County of Denver, 186 Colo. 218, 526 P.2d 658 (1974); In re LeMond, 182 Ind.App. 626, 395 N.E.2d 1287 (1979); Brooks v. Brooks, 20 Or.App. 43, 530 P.2d 547 (1975); McAtee v. McAt......
  • Petition of Giblin, No. 45274
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • 18 Julio 1975
    ...the use of [304 MINN 521] maneuver of doubtful legality may place their clients at a decided disadvantage.' See Wheeler v. District Court, 526 P.2d 658, 660 (Colo.1974), also involving an Illinois court, and a situation not unlike the one before us, where, the court characterized the act as......
  • Spaulding v. Spaulding
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • 6 Junio 1983
    ...stated that the underlying purpose of the Act is to "eliminate jurisdictional fishing with children as bait." Wheeler v. District Court, 186 Colo. 218, 220, 526 P.2d 658, 660 (1974). It is imperative that we apply the provisions of this Act so as to further these policies. Page 1364 Recogni......
  • Cricenti v. Weiland, No. 96-P-1345
    • United States
    • Appeals Court of Massachusetts
    • 19 Mayo 1998
    ...one state, jurisdiction is determined" by sections other than the provision relating to pending proceedings.) See Wheeler v. Dist. Court, 186 Colo. 218, 221, 526 P.2d 658 Page 357 (1974); In re Neville, 136 Or.App. 403, 406, 901 P.2d 957 (1995); Quenzer v. Quenzer, 653 P.2d 295, 302 (Wyo.19......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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