- INTER-STATE CHILD CUSTODY
Inter-state Child Custody Lawyer
“Across jurisdictions governed by the UCCJEA, whatever is best for the children wins. I always start with the assumption that it is critical for both parents to be involved, day to day. That’s how children thrive. However, there are situations where a child custody evaluator determines that a parent, in their current emotional or mental state, cannot add value to the child’s life. And I’ve fought heated interstate custody battles and had two successful relocation cases under UCCJEA in the last 2 years—those are incredibly hard-won. Whatever’s best for the child.”
— Elena Giannattasio | Founder, Multi-Jurisdictional Divorce
The UCCJEA Prioritizes the Best Interests of the Child
Interstate child custody disputes are often the most emotional and complex aspects of family law. Fortunately, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) provides a consistent framework for determining which state has jurisdiction and how custody should be enforced—always based on the best interests of the child.
Under the UCCJEA, courts assume joint custody is ideal unless there’s compelling evidence to the contrary. This means both parents are generally given equal consideration, and it is rare for one to lose all rights to interaction with their child. In most cases, final arrangements end in joint custody or primary custody for one parent with parenting time for the other.
Because interstate cases add another layer of complexity, most parents wisely retain experienced interstate child custody attorneys who understand how to navigate multi-jurisdictional disputes while protecting their child’s best interests.
UCCJEA vs. Hague Convention: Understanding Your Options in International Child Abduction Cases
If your child has been wrongfully taken or kept in the U.S., learn how an International Family Lawyer in New York can help you choose between the UCCJEA and the Hague Convention to pursue your child’s return.
When a Child Is Wrongfully Taken to the U.S.
Few situations are more distressing than discovering that your child has been wrongfully removed from another country and brought to the United States. Fortunately, international and domestic law offer two main legal paths to help parents recover their children:
The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, and
The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA).
Both provide ways to address cross-border custody disputes, but they function very differently. Choosing the correct legal framework can be the deciding factor in your case. An experienced International Family Lawyer in New York can guide you through this complex process and ensure that you take the most strategic approach for your situation.
When to Use the UCCJEA
The UCCJEA governs how New York courts determine and enforce child custody jurisdiction within the U.S. It can also apply in some international cases, depending on the circumstances. A UCCJEA lawyer in New York may recommend this route when the Hague Convention does not apply or where a state-based process may be more effective.
1. No Active Hague Relationship
If your home country has signed but not fully implemented the Hague Convention with the United States, you cannot file under the treaty. A UCCJEA petition in a New York state court may then be your best legal option.
2. Child Is 16 or Older
The Hague Convention only covers children under 16. If your child is older, a UCCJEA custody case may still be possible.
3. Enforcing Visitation or Access Rights
The Hague Convention primarily addresses child return, not visitation. A UCCJEA lawyer in New York can help you seek enforcement of visitation or access rights through state courts.
4. Custody Orders Issued After the Abduction
If a foreign court issued a custody order after your child was taken, that order can often be recognized and enforced under the UCCJEA.
5. Habitual Residence Disputes
While the Hague Convention requires proof of a child’s “habitual residence,” the UCCJEA focuses on the child’s “home state.” These are different legal standards, and the UCCJEA may offer a clearer path in some cases.
6. When Hague Defenses May Apply
The Hague Convention includes several defenses—such as grave risk of harm or consent—that may prevent a child’s return. The UCCJEA avoids these defenses entirely.
7. Lower Legal Costs
Hague cases often require extensive discovery and expert testimony. A UCCJEA proceeding in New York state court may be faster and less costly.
When the Hague Convention May Be the Better Choice
In many situations, a child abduction lawyer in New York will advise pursuing a case under the Hague Convention—especially when an international treaty-based remedy provides stronger jurisdiction or faster action.
1. The Foreign Court Will Not Act
Some foreign courts refuse to hear custody disputes when the child is no longer in the country. In that case, filing a Hague petition in the U.S. may be the only practical solution.
2. The Foreign Country Is Not the “Home State”
If the child lived in the foreign country for less than six months before the abduction, it may not qualify as the “home state” under the UCCJEA. The Hague Convention may still apply.
3. Lack of Notice or Due Process Abroad
If a foreign custody order was issued without proper notice or opportunity to be heard, a UCCJEA enforcement action may not succeed. A Hague petition can bypass those defects.
4. No Existing Custody Order
A Hague Convention attorney can file a case even without a custody order, as long as you have legal custody rights under the law of the child’s habitual residence.
5. Preference for Federal Court
Unlike the UCCJEA, which requires filing in state court, Hague cases can be filed in federal court. Federal judges typically apply the treaty strictly, with less emphasis on “best interest” factors.
6. Legal Aid and Cost Recovery
Some countries offer legal aid for Hague cases, and U.S. law under the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA) allows successful petitioners to recover legal costs from the respondent.
Choosing the Right Approach: UCCJEA vs. Hague
The best strategy depends on multiple factors, including:
The child’s country of habitual residence
The existence of a custody order abroad
The child’s age
Treaty relationships between countries
Jurisdictional limits of foreign courts
Cost, timing, and available legal aid
A knowledgeable international child custody lawyer in New York can analyze these details, determine which law applies, and represent you effectively in either federal or state court.
Mediation Is Often Required — and Invaluable
In many jurisdictions under the UCCJEA, child custody mediation is a required first step. This process, again, centers on what’s best for the child—not the parents. Both parties are expected to make a genuine effort to cooperate and reach an agreement, often with the guidance of a neutral, trained custody mediator.
If mediation fails, the family court will step in to determine custody, possibly limiting a parent’s ability to make decisions about their child’s upbringing. In these situations, an experienced interstate child custody mediator can be critical to preserving joint parenting authority.
WHY OUR
CLIENTS
CHOOSE US?
We’re “not
your average
law firm.“
UCCJEA: When Crossing State Lines Complicates Custody
Today’s families are more mobile than ever. Parents relocate for career opportunities, return to their home communities, or move closer to extended family. But when a child has lived in more than one state—even briefly—jurisdictional questions often arise: Which court has the authority to make custody decisions? These issues can feel especially urgent when communication between parents breaks down.
In the United States, interstate custody matters fall under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). The statute’s core purpose is to promote stability by anchoring jurisdiction in the child’s “home state.” However, determining the home state isn’t always straightforward. Complications arise when children spend substantial time in two states, when parents move frequently, or when a relocation occurs during conflict.
Understanding how the UCCJEA defines and applies home-state jurisdiction is critical. Early clarity can prevent competing court orders, reduce the risk of multi-state litigation, and provide families with a more predictable path forward.
Parents in New York or California, navigating these uncertainties shall seek guidance from an experienced intra-state child custody lawyer, in New York or San Francisco, familiar with jurisdictional nuances that arise when parents live on opposite sides of a state border.
How the UCCJEA Decides Which Court Steps In During an Emergency
Another common source of confusion arises when a parent seeks emergency custody orders. Under the UCCJEA, temporary emergency jurisdiction is available only in narrowly defined circumstances—typically when a child requires immediate protection from harm or instability. These orders are designed to provide short-term safety, not to replace the long-term custody determinations reserved for the child’s home state. Their purpose is to stabilize the situation until the appropriate home-state court can resume or assert jurisdiction.
In such situations, courts are required to communicate directly with one another, ensuring consistent treatment of the case and preventing conflicting orders from being issued in different states. This interstate coordination is one of the UCCJEA’s greatest strengths, but it is also among its most technically complex features, often requiring experienced guidance to navigate properly.
Parents in New York or California facing these challenges should consult a UCCJEA lawyer in New York or San Francisco to understand how emergency jurisdiction fits within the larger custody framework.
Cross-Border Custody Jurisdiction: The UCCJEA’s Divergence from International Practice
In most countries, courts may assume jurisdiction to modify existing custody orders whenever a child becomes habitually or ordinarily resident in that country—even if a previous order was issued abroad. This approach reflects a global, widely accepted principle: custody should be determined by the courts located where the child actually lives.
The United States takes a very different path. Under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), once a U.S. state issues an initial custody determination, that state typically retains exclusive, continuing jurisdiction so long as one parent continues to reside there. The result is a fundamental divergence between American custody law and the jurisdictional rules applied in much of the world.
These differences can create sharp conflicts, particularly when children relocate internationally.
A Case Illustrating the Conflict and Its Outcome
In a Rhode Island case, Hogan v. McAndrew, highlights the tension between the U.S. model and international norms. In that case, the children moved with their mother from Rhode Island to Ireland following a divorce settlement authorizing their relocation. The agreement included extensive parenting time for the father and explicitly stated that Rhode Island would retain jurisdiction. The father remained in Rhode Island. After several years, he filed an emergency motion in Rhode Island seeking to modify custody. By then, the mother and children had long been living in Ireland, and she initiated a parallel custody proceeding before the Irish High Court. From Ireland’s perspective, the children were habitually resident there. Under Irish law—much like the law in most countries—the local court would naturally view itself as the proper forum. Under the UCCJEA, however, Rhode Island still had exclusive jurisdiction because one parent (the father) remained domiciled there. These two systems collided head-on.
The Forum Non Conveniens Issue:
The mother argued that Rhode Island should decline jurisdiction under the doctrine of inconvenient forum, since the children’s lives were centered entirely in Ireland. A trial judge initially agreed and declined to hear the case. But the Rhode Island Supreme Court reversed, holding that the lower court had failed to conduct the thorough, two-part analysis required by the UCCJEA. A U.S. court with continuing exclusive jurisdiction may decline jurisdiction only if: 1. the state is an inconvenient forum and 2. another state (or foreign tribunal) is clearly a more appropriate forum. The court emphasized that abandoning jurisdiction is a decision not to be taken lightly.
The Importance of the Original Agreement:
The Supreme Court also stressed the significance of the parties’ original agreement. The forum-selection clause—confirming the parents’ intention that Rhode Island retain jurisdiction—played a major role in the father’s decision to agree to the children’s relocation. The court held that this contractual element had not been afforded sufficient weight. Furthermore, there was no clear evidence regarding: • whether Irish courts would recognize an American joint-custody arrangement, or • whether Irish courts consider children’s preferences in custody matters Both points were essential to any meaningful forum analysis. Because of these gaps, the Supreme Court remanded the matter to the trial court for a more comprehensive evaluation. The strong implication was that Rhode Island should retain jurisdiction.
International Perspective:
Such a conclusion would likely surprise courts abroad. In most of the world, the place where the child actually lives dictates which court should determine their best interests. Five years of residence in Ireland would almost certainly lead an Irish court to view itself as the proper authority. Whether the Irish High Court will ultimately defer to Rhode Island, or whether competing orders will arise, remains uncertain.
A Wider Lesson
This case underscores a broader truth: U.S. custody jurisdiction under the UCCJEA is fundamentally different from the rest of the world’s approach. When international relocation is involved, the potential for jurisdictional conflict is significant. Parents, and their lawyers, must be aware of these differences before agreeing to moves, drafting parenting plans, or negotiating relocation clauses. For internationally mobile families, proper legal guidance is essential to avoid unintended legal battles across borders.
The Role of a New York Child Abduction Lawyer
Because New York courts frequently handle complex cross-border custody disputes, choosing an experienced child abduction lawyer in New York is crucial. Your attorney will assess jurisdiction, coordinate with foreign counsel, and advocate for your child’s prompt and lawful return.
If your case involves both interstate and international issues, an intra-state child custody lawyer in New York can also assist with conflicts between state custody orders and international judgments under the UCCJEA.
Work With an Experienced International Family Lawyer in New York
If your child has been wrongfully taken to or kept in the United States, you don’t have to face the situation alone. Our firm represents parents from around the world in Hague Convention, UCCJEA, and international child custody cases.
An experienced International Family Lawyer in New York can:
- Determine the most effective legal path for your situation
- File petitions under the Hague Convention or UCCJEA
- Coordinate with foreign authorities and legal teams
- Protect your parental rights under U.S. and international law
Contact us today at +1 213-314-4244 or email Elena@multi-jurisdictionaldivorce.com to schedule a confidential consultation with Elena Giannattasio, a New York international child custody lawyer and learn how she can help you secure your child’s safe return.
When a child custody dispute spans state lines, the legal terrain can shift unexpectedly. At Multi-Jurisdictional Divorce, PLLC, we guide families through inter-state custody with clarity and precision. Whether you’re navigating the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) or long-arm statutes, our strategy combines global perspective with focused enforcement. Elena Giannattasio ensures your child’s welfare remains central, your rights protected, and the jurisdictional framework leveraged to your advantage.
When a child custody dispute spans state lines, the legal terrain can shift unexpectedly. At Multi-Jurisdictional Divorce, PLLC, we guide families through inter-state custody with clarity and precision. Whether you’re navigating the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) or long-arm statutes, our strategy combines global perspective with focused enforcement. Elena Giannattasio ensures your child’s welfare remains central, your rights protected, and the jurisdictional framework leveraged to your advantage.
NEXT STEP
Book a consultation
Interstate Child Custody Solutions Under UCCJEA
If you’re facing custody issues across state lines, Elena Giannattasio, a trusted UCCJEA Lawyer in New York and Intra-State Child Custody Lawyer in New York, can provide strategic and compassionate guidance for parenting time, relocation, and complex interstate custody matters under the UCCJEA. Contact her today at +1 213-314-4244 or via email at Elena@multi-jurisdictionaldivorce.com to protect your parental rights and secure the best outcomes for your children.
Want to feel secure about your future?
The Harsh Reality of Child Marriage in the U.S. and Worldwide: An International Divorce Lawyer in New York Advocating for Victims
Underage marriage, which involves at least one party below the age of 18, remains a reality both in the United States and worldwide. A. In the United States In the United States, thousands of minors are legally married each year,
Cruz v. Cruz: The Importance of Careful Drafting in Divorce Settlements, Separations Agreements, Prenuptial and Postnuptial Agreements
The ruling in Cruz v. Cruz, 213 A.D.3d 805 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023) is an important reminder of the importance of clear and comprehensive drafting in divorce settlements, separation agreements and prenuptial and postnuptial agreements. Poorly drafted or ambiguous agreements
New UAE Personal Status Laws: Penalties for Parents Traveling with Minors Unauthorized – Tips of U.S. Left Behind Parent
Under the new UAE personal status laws, effective April 15, 2025, custodian parents traveling with minors without first obtaining the consent of the child’s legal guardian or the approval of the court, will face significant penalties: fines of Dh5,000 to
Let’s discuss about a much better tomorrow.
Schedule a consultation with me.
