Douglas Stein v. Stephanie Wilcox (2013)

MEMORANDUM OF LAW REGARDING MOTION TO DISMISS

A review of the record reveals that the parties are the parents of one child, Bailey Victoria Stein, born December 29, 2008.   The father initiated this custody proceeding on September 13, 2012.   Appended to the complaint is the required Affidavit Concerning Custody form listing the residences of the child.   From that form, one can see that the child lived in Connecticut with both parents from the date of her birth until October 2011.   The mother relocated with the child to her home state of Washington in October 2011, remaining there until April 2012 or approximately six months.   The mother and the child then returned to Connecticut in April 2012 until July 25, 2012 when she and the child returned to Washington.   The father has continuously resided in the state of Connecticut.

A hearing was held on the question of jurisdiction on October 15, 2012.   The defendant did not appear or participate.   The court, Nazzaro, J., ruled that Connecticut has jurisdiction.

Thereafter, a hearing was held before the undersigned on April 29, 2013 wherein the defendant participated telephonically.   She testified that the child in fact resided in Connecticut from the time of her birth until October 2011 and that she relocated to Washington with the child in October 2011 for approximately six months, primarily to care for her ill relatives.   She testified that she and the child came to Connecticut on or about May 1, 2012 until July 25, 2012 for a visit but not to live.   She testified that she worked in Connecticut during those three months and resided with the plaintiff.   She testified that she returned to Washington with the child on July 25, 2012.

The court finds that the ruling of October 15, 2012 that Connecticut has jurisdiction is a valid court order and that the issue is res judicata.   Notwithstanding, this court conducted an independent inquiry of the defendant regarding the residences of the child during her lifetime.   This court concludes that Connecticut is the home state of the child and that the five or six months when she returned to Washington in October 2011 was a temporary and not permanent move.   The child lived in Connecticut continuously until October 2011 except for the six-month return to Washington and lived in Connecticut continuously until the mother's relocation back to Washington on July 25, 2012.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, this court reiterates that Connecticut is the home state of the child.   The court will appoint a guardian ad litem for the child in Connecticut, at state rates, at no cost to the parties to investigate which parent provides the most suitable custody and visitation plan.   Following the guardian ad litem's investigation, the matter will return to the court to implement orders regarding the care and custody of the child.

Shluger, J.

Shluger, Kenneth L., J.