Legal Opinion
Barclay v. Eckert
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided January 21, 2000No. 4. Communicating with other states. Before determining whether to decline or retain jurisdiction, the court may communicate with a court of another state and exchange information pertinent to the assumption of jurisdiction by either court with a view to ensuring that jurisdiction will be exercised by the more appropriate court and that a forum will be available to the partiesPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDana, J.
[¶ 1] William Barclay appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court (Hancock County, Marsano, J.) affirming a judgment of the District Court (Bar Harbor, Romei, J.) that it had jurisdiction to hear a petition brought by Wendy Eckert to modify the parties’ original Maine divorce decree regarding parental rights and responsibilities. On appeal, Barclay argues that the District Court erred when it determined that Maine continues to be the appropriate jurisdiction for the resolution of parental rights and responsibilities issues between the parties. Finding no error, we affirm.
I
[¶ 2] William…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Barndt v. BarndtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Matter of Marriage of GreenlawWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- McDow v. McDowAlaska Supreme Court · 1996
- Alley v. ParkerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1998
- In re the Custody of K.R.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1995
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. WilderSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2000
- In Re Amberley D.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- Shanoski v. MillerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- Cole v. CushmanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2008
- State ex rel. Seaton v. HolmesOhio Supreme Court · 2003
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.