Opinion ID: 891574
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: uccjea

Text: {13} State legislatures around the nation, including our own, have passed the UCCJEA to combat the problem of conflicting child-custody orders and an epidemic of forum-shopping by parents unsatisfied with child-custody decrees in their home states. All fifty states have passed versions of the UCCJEA or its similar predecessor, the Uniform Child-Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA). The statute sets up a two-tiered approach for determining what state has jurisdiction over child-custody matters. First, for purposes of the statute, it asks, which state is the home state? See § 40-10A-201(a)(1)-(4). If one state can be established as the home state, and a child-custody action is filed first in that state, any other states which have passed a similar statute must stay their proceedings, or decline to exercise jurisdiction. See § 40-10A-206. Once the home state reaches a final judgment, it has continuing jurisdiction, subject to several conditions. See § 40-10A-202(a)(1)-(2). {14} If this first tier of analysis is exhausted with no state qualifying as the home state within the meaning of the UCCJEA, the analysis then shifts to the second tier. Here, a court is to ask whether the child and at least one parent have significant connections with either state. See § 40-10A-201(a)(2)(A). The first action filed in a state with significant connections preempts any action later filed in another state. See § 40-10A-206.