This page is an unofficial LFoD record and is not legal advice. Verify the document against the official source before relying on it.

RSA 458-A:18: Inconvenient Forum

Document type: RSA section
Citation: RSA 458-A:18

458-A:18 Inconvenient Forum. –

A court of this state which has jurisdiction under this chapter to make a child-custody determination may decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time if it determines that it is an inconvenient forum under the circumstances and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum. The issue of inconvenient forum may be raised upon motion of a party, the court's own motion, or request of another court.

II.

Before determining whether it is an inconvenient forum, a court of this state shall consider whether it is appropriate for a court of another state to exercise jurisdiction. For this purpose, the court shall allow the parties to submit information and shall consider all relevant factors, including:

(a)

Whether domestic violence has occurred and is likely to continue in the future and which state could best protect the parties and the child;

(b)

The length of time the child has resided outside this state;

(c)

The distance between the court in this state and the court in the state that would assume jurisdiction;

(d)

The relative financial circumstances of the parties;

(e)

Any agreement of the parties as to which state should assume jurisdiction;

(f)

The nature and location of the evidence required to resolve the pending litigation, including testimony of the child;

(g)

The ability of the court of each state to decide the issue expeditiously and the procedures necessary to present the evidence; and

(h)

The familiarity of the court of each state with the facts and issues in the pending litigation.

III.

If a court of this state determines that it is an inconvenient forum and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum, it shall stay the proceedings upon condition that a child-custody proceeding be promptly commenced in another designated state and may impose any other condition the court considers just and proper.

IV.

A court of this state may decline to exercise its jurisdiction under this chapter if a child-custody determination is incidental to an action for divorce or another proceeding while still retaining jurisdiction over the divorce or other proceeding. Source. 2009, 191:1, eff. Dec. 1, 2010.