Legal Opinion

In re the Marriage of Robinson

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided December 28, 2010No. 27143-9-IIIPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKulik, C.J.

¶1 — Subject matter jurisdiction in dissolution proceedings exists if one of the parties is a resident of Washington during the proceedings. Residence is domicile in fact and intent to reside presently in Washington.

¶2 Here, by their own statements, neither Douglas nor Juraluck Robinson resided, or intended to reside, in Washington at the filing or during the pendency of the dissolution. Therefore, the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. We reverse the denial of the motion to vacate the dissolution and vacate the dissolution decree.

FACTS

¶3 Douglas and Juraluck Robinson married on…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Williams v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. In Re Adoption of BuehlWashington Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Conom v. Snohomish CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Conom v. Snohomish CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  5. In Re the Marriage of OrtizWashington Supreme Court · 1987

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re the Marriage of BueckingWashington Supreme Court · 2013
  2. In Re Marriage of BueckingWashington Supreme Court · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API