Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Matter of Terry CURTIS, Appellant, v. Penelope CURTIS, Respondent.
Although Family Court properly determined that it had subject matter jurisdiction over the petition (see, 28 U.S.C. § 1738A [a], [d], [f]; see also, Capobianco v. Willis, 171 A.D.2d 834, 567 N.Y.S.2d 770; Sobie, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 14, Domestic Relations Law § 75-d), it abused its discretion in dismissing the petition on the ground that New York State is an inconvenient forum (see, Domestic Relations Law § 75-h). The court, in declining to exercise jurisdiction, placed far too much emphasis on the fact that the child resides in the Commonwealth of Virginia and too little emphasis on respondent's reprehensible conduct in removing the child from New York State in violation of the court's custody and visitation order and secreting the child in Virginia, which resulted in the complete frustration of petitioner's visitation rights (see, Grossman v. Meller, 213 A.D.2d 221, 623 N.Y.S.2d 857). In light of the indigency of petitioner, making him unable to participate meaningfully in a hearing in Virginia, and the fact that the parties may obtain relevant evidence from Virginia pursuant to the reciprocal provisions of Domestic Relations Law §§ 75-r and 75-s, we conclude that the hearing on the petition, which is limited solely to the issue of enforcement of petitioner's established visitation rights, must be held before Monroe County Family Court (cf., Matter of Swain v. Vogt, 206 A.D.2d 703, 614 N.Y.S.2d 780).
Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied, petition reinstated and matter remitted to Monroe County Family Court for further proceedings.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 14, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)