§ 31-18.5-2-5 — Continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify child support order

Indiana § 31-18.5-2-5

• Jurisdiction: Indiana
• Art. 18.5: FAMILY LAW: UNIFORM INTERSTATE
• Ch. 2: Jurisdiction

Text

(a) An Indiana tribunal that has issued a child
support order consistent with Indiana law has and shall exercise
continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify its child support order if
the order is the controlling order and:
(1) at the time of the filing of a request for modification Indiana
is the residence of:
(A) the obligor;
(B) the individual obligee; or
(C) the child for whose benefit the support order is issued; or
(2) even if Indiana is not the residence of:
(A) the obligor;
(B) the individual obligee; or
(C) the child for whose benefit the support order is issued;
the parties consent in a record or in open court that an Indiana
tribunal may continue to exercise jurisdiction to modify its order.
(b) An Indiana tribunal that has issued a child support order
consistent with Indiana law may not exercise continuing, exclusive
jurisdiction to modify the order if:
(1) all of the parties who are individuals file consent in a record
with the Indiana tribunal that a tribunal of another state that has
jurisdiction over at least one (1) of the parties who is an
individual or that is located in the state of residence of the child
may modify the order and assume continuing, exclusive
jurisdiction; or
(2) its order is not the controlling order.
(c) If a tribunal of another state has issued a child support order
pursuant to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act or a law
substantially similar to that act which modifies a child support order of
an Indiana tribunal, Indiana tribunals shall recognize the continuing,
exclusive jurisdiction of the tribunal of the other state.
(d) An Indiana tribunal that lacks continuing, exclusive jurisdiction
to modify a child support order may serve as an initiating tribunal to
request a tribunal of another state to modify a support order issued in
that state.
(e) A temporary support order issued ex parte or pending resolution
of a jurisdictional conflict does not create continuing, exclusive
jurisdiction in the issuing tribunal.

Legislative History

As added by P.L.206-2015, SEC.53.