Richardson v. Richardson

Supreme Court of Georgia

Richardson v. Richardson

355 S.E.2d 664, 257 Ga. 101, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 746

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMay 19, 1987

Docket44336

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 355 S.E.2d 664 (Richardson v. Richardson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Richardson v. Richardson, 355 S.E.2d 664, 257 Ga. 101, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 746 (Ga. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Weltner, Justice.

1. The mother removed the minor child of the parties from DeKalb County, Georgia, to the Federal Republic of Germany. At the time, there was in effect no court order providing for custody of the child. Subsequently, she obtained from the German court a decree awarding custody to her. Thereafter, the father filed a complaint in DeKalb Superior Court and attempted to serve the mother, in Germany, by publication. The trial court entered an award of permanent custody of the child in favor of the father. The mother appeals.

2. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, OCGA § 19-9-40 et seq., is applicable only to states, territories, or possessions of the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. Binns v. Smith, 251 Ga. 861 (310 SE2d 225) (1984). One of the stated purposes of the Act is to “avoid jurisdictional competition with courts of the states in matters of custody. . . .” (Emphasis supplied.) OCGA § 19-9-41. Thus, lacking personal service within Georgia, it follows that the Georgia court was without jurisdiction to award custody of the child to the father.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Weltner, Justice.

1. The mother removed the minor child of the parties from DeKalb County, Georgia, to the Federal Republic of Germany. At the time, there was in effect no court order providing for custody of the child. Subsequently, she obtained from the German court a decree awarding custody to her. Thereafter, the father filed a complaint in DeKalb Superior Court and attempted to serve the mother, in Germany, by publication. The trial court entered an award of permanent custody of the child in favor of the father. The mother appeals.

2. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, OCGA § 19-9-40 et seq., is applicable only to states, territories, or possessions of the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. Binns v. Smith, 251 Ga. 861 (310 SE2d 225) (1984). One of the stated purposes of the Act is to “avoid jurisdictional competition with courts of the states in matters of custody. . . .” (Emphasis supplied.) OCGA § 19-9-41. Thus, lacking personal service within Georgia, it follows that the Georgia court was without jurisdiction to award custody of the child to the father.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

355 S.E.2d 664, 257 Ga. 101, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 746, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-v-richardson-ga-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack