SUMMARY--Establishes domestic violence as grounds for establishing emergency jurisdiction for purposes of Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act. (BDR 11-572)
FISCAL NOTE: Effect on Local Government: No.
Effect on the State or on Industrial Insurance: No.
EXPLANATION - Matter in italics is new; matter in brackets [ ] is material to be omitted.
AN ACT relating to child custody; establishing domestic violence as a grounds for establishing emergency jurisdiction for the purposes of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEMBLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 NRS 125A.050 is hereby amended to read as follows:
125A.050 1. A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modifying decree if:
(a) This state:
(1) Is the home state of the child at the time of commencement of the proceeding; or
(2) Had been the child's home state within 6 months before commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from this state because of his removal or retention by a person claiming his custody or for other reasons, and a parent or person acting as parent continues to live in this state;
(b) It is in the best interest of the child that a court of this state assume jurisdiction because:
(1) The child and his parents, or the child and at least one contestant, have a significant connection with this state; and
(2) There is available in this state substantial evidence concerning the child's present or future care, protection, training and personal relationships;
(c) The child is physically present in this state and:
(1) The child has been abandoned; or
(2) It is necessary in an emergency to protect the best interests of the child because [he] :
(I) The child has been subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse or is otherwise neglected; or
(II) It appears to the satisfaction of the court from specific facts set forth in a verified statement of one contestant who is physically present in this state that he has been subjected to or threatened with an act which constitutes domestic violence pursuant to NRS 33.018 by an opposing contestant in the child custody matter;
(d) It appears that no other state would have jurisdiction under prerequisites substantially in accordance with paragraphs (a), (b) or (c), or another state has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this state is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child, and it is in the best interest of the child that this court assume jurisdiction; or
(e) The child is not subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of an Indian tribe pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act.
2. Except under paragraphs (c) and (d) of subsection 1, physical presence in this state of the child, or of the child and one of the contestants, is not alone sufficient to confer jurisdiction on a court of this state to make a child custody determination.
3. Physical presence of the child, while desirable, is not a prerequisite for jurisdiction to determine his custody.