Why Filing Divorce Papers in Separate States Complicates Things

Earlier this year, the Colorado State Supreme Court issued a ruling involving a Denver judge’s assertion that she had jurisdiction over a divorce between a Colorado woman and a Nebraska man. The judge had decided that despite the man living in Nebraska, his ownership of properties in Colorado determined her jurisdiction over the divorce. The Nebraska man appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court where they agreed.

“We hold that for a court to exercise general personal jurisdiction over an individual,

the individual must be domiciled within the state. Because Mr. Green is not domiciled in Colorado, he is not subject to general personal jurisdiction here. Therefore, we make our rule to show cause absolute and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

This begs the question, can a couple living in two separate states file for divorce in each respective state? Given that each state has its own marriage and divorce laws, it seems that filing across two states would complicate matters. Is it possible, even legal, to file in different jurisdictions? Yes, but it needlessly complicates matters and creates a far bigger legal headache than necessary.

Jurisdictional Conflict

The main issue at hand is jurisdictional conflict – does the court have the authority to preside and make a judgment over the issue at hand? Each state has its own residency requirements when filing for divorce. Usually this means one or both spouses have to live in the state for a certain amount of time (often three months to a year). For example, if you ask a Denver divorce attorney, Colorado requires that both parties live in the state for 91 days. These jurisdictional rules are in place in order to prevent what is known as “forum shopping.”

Forum shopping is when one or both parties attempt to file for divorce in a state they perceive to have laws friendlier to their situation. It’s an attempt to “game the system,” more or less. Alaska, for example, has more equitable, though not necessarily equal, property distribution practices. New Hampshire is another state that is considered easier to divorce with a process known as “Joint Petition,” where both parties work together to outline the terms of their divorce, allowing the process to move more easily. If one or both parties attempt to forum shop, there can be disputes over which state has the authority to oversee the divorce. Courts are wary of this practice and scrutinize the filings to make sure that the venue hasn’t been chosen purely to give one party an unfair advantage in the proceedings.

In order to determine jurisdiction, courts assess several factors: location of the marital home, length of time the couple has lived in their respective states, and the location of their marital assets. Whichever state the couple has lived the longest and most recently is typically the jurisdiction that wins out. If both states claim jurisdiction, a legal battle ensues and the length of time the divorce proceedings take gets much longer. When jurisdictional conflicts arise, courts may stay the proceedings or dismiss them outright in favor of the court with stronger jurisdictional claims. The principle known as “comity” refers to legal reciprocity and respect between courts of different jurisdictions. People that meet at the same cocktail parties typically want to get along with one another. Jurisdictional battles can complicate matters.

The way they resolve disputes is by simply communicating directly with one another. Inter-court communication simplifies the process and encourages cooperation. It’s cutting the middleman out in favor of making courtroom staffers’ lives easier. Judges will discuss the relevant facts with one another to help determine which court has jurisdiction over the matter.

UCCJEA (Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act)

When kids are involved, the UCCJEA steps in. This law is crucial in determining which state has jurisdiction over custody matters. Under this law, the home state of the child – defined as the state where the child has lived for the six months prior to proceedings – usually has jurisdiction.

Courts try very hard to make divorce as easy as possible on the kids, knowing what we know about the psychological effect divorce has on a child. Unfortunately, parents antagonistic to one another during a divorce will sometimes use their children as pawns in their battles. Courts often step in to keep this kind of drama from happening.

Legal Costs and Delays

If there’s a jurisdictional dispute, there are increased legal costs that come with it. Determining which court has jurisdiction requires additional proceedings where attorneys must argue before a judge. This takes a lot of time and even more money. Not to mention the added emotional strain on both parties.

Enforcement of Judgments

Once the dispute has been resolved, next comes enforcement. Article IV, Section I of the Constitution, known as the Full Faith and Credit Clause, requires that states honor the judicial proceedings of other states. While most of the time, this is respected, there are circumstances where one party can contest the validity of the decision and fight it. This is exactly what happened in the divorce between the Nebraska man and Colorado woman. In the end, the Colorado Supreme Court decided that they did not have the proper authority to exert jurisdiction. It’s unlikely that Nebraska would dispute that ruling.

Try to File for Divorce in the Same State

Divorce is potentially complicated even in the best of circumstances. Filing in separate states only complicates matters further. While you cannot stop a vindictive party in a divorce who just wants to fight, filing in separate states is more complicated and more of a headache than its worth for even the most petty of people.

Mike

Find top rated attorneys and law firms profiles with Find Attorneys Directory, the best and free online attorney directory. Guest bloggers can also publish their articles here as other bloggers are doing.