Grumme v. Grumme


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2003-CA-01209-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 05-06-2004
Opinion Author: Easley, J.
Holding: Reversed and Remanded

Additional Case Information: Topic: Modification of child support - Jurisdiction - Uniform Interstate Family Support Act - Section 93-25-93 - Section 93-25-101 - Section 93-25-107
Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Carlson, Graves and Dickinson, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz and Randolph, JJ.
Procedural History: Dismissal
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-07-2003
Appealed from: Jackson County Chancery Court
Judge: Glenn Barlow
Disposition: Dismissed the action for lack of jurisdiction.
Case Number: 2003-0035-GB

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Claire Louise Grumme




W. EUGENE HENR



 

Appellee: Darren W. Grumme DEMPSEY M. LEVI  

Synopsis provided by:

If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals
hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office.

Topic: Modification of child support - Jurisdiction - Uniform Interstate Family Support Act - Section 93-25-93 - Section 93-25-101 - Section 93-25-107

Summary of the Facts: Claire Grumme and Darren Grumme were divorced in Guam. In the Property Settlement Agreement incorporated in the final Judgment, Claire received physical and legal custody of the couple’s minor child subject to Darren's visitation rights, and Darren was ordered to pay $350 per month in child support. The parties also agreed that jurisdiction over future issues would be in the country where the wife and child reside. While Claire was a resident of the United Kingdom and Darren was a resident of Jackson County, Mississippi, Claire filed an action in the Jackson County Chancery Court seeking to register the Guam Judgment of Divorce and to register and enforce and modify the order of support as allowed by the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act. Darren filed a motion to dismiss, and the court granted the motion for lack of jurisdiction. Claire appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Section 93-25-83 specifies the procedure required to register a foreign order. Section 93-25-93 (1) provides that the party contesting the validity or enforcement of a registered order or seeking to vacate the registration has the burden of proving one of a number of defenses. Darren's objection to registration of the order for enforcement does not fall within these objections. Section 93-25-93 (3) provides that if the contesting party does not establish one of these defenses, the registering tribunal shall issue an order confirming the order and may then modify the order pursuant to section 93-25-101 if the provisions of section 93-25-107 are not applicable and the child, the individual obligee and the obligor do not reside in the issuing state; a petitioner who is a nonresident of this state seeks modification; and the respondent is subject to the personal jurisdiction of the tribunal of this state. Section 93-25-107 is not applicable here, and this case meets the statutory requirements to bring this matter in the Jackson County Chancery Court for modification.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court