Summary
The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed a trial court’s authority under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act to modify a 1997 child custody determination after the custodial parent moved out of state. The court held that the UCCJEA venue provision did not violate Georgia’s constitutional venue requirement, that the pre-UCCJEA custody determination could support jurisdiction, and that personal jurisdiction over the appellant was unnecessary for the modification action.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether OCGA § 19-9-62(a), which places venue for a child-custody modification proceeding in the court that made the initial custody determination, violates the Georgia Constitution's venue provision.
- Whether the Georgia trial court could exercise jurisdiction under the UCCJEA to modify a child-custody determination entered before Georgia enacted the UCCJEA.
- Whether the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction over the custody-modification action and whether personal jurisdiction over the nonresident custodial parent was necessary.
Holdings
- OCGA § 19-9-62(a) does not violate Article VI, Section II, Paragraph VI of the Georgia Constitution because that constitutional venue provision applies to defendants who reside in a Georgia county and therefore does not govern an out-of-state defendant who resides in no Georgia county.
- The Georgia trial court retained UCCJEA jurisdiction to modify the 1997 custody determination even though that determination predated enactment of the UCCJEA, because OCGA § 19-9-62(a) requires the prior determination to have been entered consistent with the specified jurisdictional provisions, not pursuant to provisions enacted after the original determination.
- The trial court had subject matter jurisdiction over the custody-modification action under OCGA § 19-9-62, and personal jurisdiction over the nonresident parent was not required to adjudicate the requested modification.
Key quotations
“By its plain language, this provision has no application to out-of-state defendants for the obvious reason that they do not reside in any county in this State.” (at 368)
“The trial court correctly concluded that it has subject matter jurisdiction over appellee’s modification action pursuant to OCGA § 19-9-62 and that personal jurisdiction over appellant was not necessary in order for it to address the requested modification of its child custody determination.” (at 369)
Factual background
Christa and Anthony Devito divorced in Taylor County in 1997, with Christa receiving sole legal custody and Anthony receiving visitation rights. Christa moved with the child to Louisiana in 2002, while Anthony remained in Taylor County. In 2004, Anthony sought modification of the custody and visitation provisions, and he also sought contempt for alleged violations of the visitation provisions. No other court had entered a ruling addressing custody since the original 1997 determination.
Procedural history
The parties divorced in Taylor County in 1997, and Christa Devito was awarded sole legal custody while Anthony Devito received visitation rights. After Christa and the child moved to Louisiana, Anthony filed motions in the Georgia trial court to modify custody and visitation and to hold Christa in contempt. The trial court ruled that it lacked personal jurisdiction over Christa for the contempt proceeding but retained subject matter jurisdiction over the custody-modification action, concluded that personal jurisdiction was unnecessary for that action, and upheld the constitutionality of OCGA § 19-9-62(a). The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the venue and jurisdiction rulings concerning the modification action.