§ 76-f. Inconvenient forum.
1.A court of this state which has\njurisdiction under this article to make a child custody determination\nmay decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time if it determines\nthat it is an inconvenient forum under the circumstances and that a\ncourt of another state is a more appropriate forum. The issue of\ninconvenient forum may be raised upon motion of a party, the child or\nthe child's attorney, or upon the court's own motion, or request of\nanother court.\n 2. Before determining whether it is an inconvenient forum, a court of\nthis state shall consider whether it is appropriate for a court of\nanother state to exercise jurisdiction. For this purpose, the court\nshall allow the parties to submit information and shall consider all\nrelevant factors, inc
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
§ 76-f. Inconvenient forum. 1. A court of this state which has\njurisdiction under this article to make a child custody determination\nmay decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time if it determines\nthat it is an inconvenient forum under the circumstances and that a\ncourt of another state is a more appropriate forum. The issue of\ninconvenient forum may be raised upon motion of a party, the child or\nthe child's attorney, or upon the court's own motion, or request of\nanother court.\n 2. Before determining whether it is an inconvenient forum, a court of\nthis state shall consider whether it is appropriate for a court of\nanother state to exercise jurisdiction. For this purpose, the court\nshall allow the parties to submit information and shall consider all\nrelevant factors, including:\n (a) whether domestic violence or mistreatment or abuse of a child or\nsibling has occurred and is likely to continue in the future and which\nstate could best protect the parties and the child;\n (b) the length of time the child has resided outside this state;\n (c) the distance between the court in this state and the court in the\nstate that would assume jurisdiction;\n (d) the relative financial circumstances of the parties;\n (e) any agreement of the parties as to which state should assume\njurisdiction;\n (f) the nature and location of the evidence required to resolve the\npending litigation, including testimony of the child;\n (g) the ability of the court of each state to decide the issue\nexpeditiously and the procedures necessary to present the evidence; and\n (h) the familiarity of the court of each state with the facts and\nissues in the pending litigation.\n 3. If a court of this state determines that it is an inconvenient\nforum and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum, it\nshall stay the proceedings upon condition that a child custody\nproceeding be promptly commenced in another designated state and may\nimpose any other condition the court considers just and proper.\n 4. A court of this state may decline to exercise its jurisdiction\nunder this article if a child custody determination is incidental to an\naction for divorce or another proceeding while still retaining\njurisdiction over the divorce or other proceeding.\n