23-9,205.Continuing, exclusive jurisdiction.(a) A tribunal of this state issuing a support orderconsistentwith the law of this state has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a childsupport order:
(1) As long as this state remains the residence of the obligor, theindividualobligee or the child for whose benefit the support order is issued; or
(2) until all of the parties who areindividuals have filed written consents with the tribunalof this state for a tribunal of another state to modify the order and assumecontinuing, exclusive jurisdiction.
(b) A tribunal of this state issuing a child support order consistent withthe law of this state may not exercise its continuing jurisdiction to modifythe order if the order has been modified by a tribunal of another statepursuant to this act or to a law substantially similar to this act.
(c) If a child support order of this state is modified by a tribunal ofanother state pursuant to this act or to a law substantially similar tothis act, a tribunalof this state loses its continuing, exclusive jurisdiction with regard toprospective enforcement of the order issued in this state, and may only:
(1) Enforce the order that was modified as to amounts accruing before themodification;
(2) enforce nonmodifiable aspects of that order; and
(3) provide other appropriate relief for violations of that order whichoccurred before the effective date of the modification.
(d) A tribunal of this state shall recognize the continuing, exclusivejurisdiction of a tribunal of another state which has issued a child supportorder pursuant to this act or to a law substantially similar to this act.
(e) A temporary support order issued ex parte or pending resolution of ajurisdictional conflict does not create continuing, exclusive jurisdiction inthe issuing tribunal.
(f) A tribunal of this state issuing a support order consistent with the lawof this state has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a spousal supportorder throughout the existence of the support obligation. A tribunal of thisstate may not modify a spousal support order issued by a tribunal of anotherstate having continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over that order under the lawof that state.
History: L. 1994, ch. 301, § 39;L. 1997, ch. 182, § 34; July 3.
23-9,205.Continuing, exclusive jurisdiction.(a) A tribunal of this state issuing a support orderconsistentwith the law of this state has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a childsupport order:
(1) As long as this state remains the residence of the obligor, theindividualobligee or the child for whose benefit the support order is issued; or
(2) until all of the parties who areindividuals have filed written consents with the tribunalof this state for a tribunal of another state to modify the order and assumecontinuing, exclusive jurisdiction.
(b) A tribunal of this state issuing a child support order consistent withthe law of this state may not exercise its continuing jurisdiction to modifythe order if the order has been modified by a tribunal of another statepursuant to this act or to a law substantially similar to this act.
(c) If a child support order of this state is modified by a tribunal ofanother state pursuant to this act or to a law substantially similar tothis act, a tribunalof this state loses its continuing, exclusive jurisdiction with regard toprospective enforcement of the order issued in this state, and may only:
(1) Enforce the order that was modified as to amounts accruing before themodification;
(2) enforce nonmodifiable aspects of that order; and
(3) provide other appropriate relief for violations of that order whichoccurred before the effective date of the modification.
(d) A tribunal of this state shall recognize the continuing, exclusivejurisdiction of a tribunal of another state which has issued a child supportorder pursuant to this act or to a law substantially similar to this act.
(e) A temporary support order issued ex parte or pending resolution of ajurisdictional conflict does not create continuing, exclusive jurisdiction inthe issuing tribunal.
(f) A tribunal of this state issuing a support order consistent with the lawof this state has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a spousal supportorder throughout the existence of the support obligation. A tribunal of thisstate may not modify a spousal support order issued by a tribunal of anotherstate having continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over that order under the lawof that state.
History: L. 1994, ch. 301, § 39;L. 1997, ch. 182, § 34; July 3.
23-9,205.Continuing, exclusive jurisdiction.(a) A tribunal of this state issuing a support orderconsistentwith the law of this state has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a childsupport order:
(1) As long as this state remains the residence of the obligor, theindividualobligee or the child for whose benefit the support order is issued; or
(2) until all of the parties who areindividuals have filed written consents with the tribunalof this state for a tribunal of another state to modify the order and assumecontinuing, exclusive jurisdiction.
(b) A tribunal of this state issuing a child support order consistent withthe law of this state may not exercise its continuing jurisdiction to modifythe order if the order has been modified by a tribunal of another statepursuant to this act or to a law substantially similar to this act.
(c) If a child support order of this state is modified by a tribunal ofanother state pursuant to this act or to a law substantially similar tothis act, a tribunalof this state loses its continuing, exclusive jurisdiction with regard toprospective enforcement of the order issued in this state, and may only:
(1) Enforce the order that was modified as to amounts accruing before themodification;
(2) enforce nonmodifiable aspects of that order; and
(3) provide other appropriate relief for violations of that order whichoccurred before the effective date of the modification.
(d) A tribunal of this state shall recognize the continuing, exclusivejurisdiction of a tribunal of another state which has issued a child supportorder pursuant to this act or to a law substantially similar to this act.
(e) A temporary support order issued ex parte or pending resolution of ajurisdictional conflict does not create continuing, exclusive jurisdiction inthe issuing tribunal.
(f) A tribunal of this state issuing a support order consistent with the lawof this state has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a spousal supportorder throughout the existence of the support obligation. A tribunal of thisstate may not modify a spousal support order issued by a tribunal of anotherstate having continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over that order under the lawof that state.
History: L. 1994, ch. 301, § 39;L. 1997, ch. 182, § 34; July 3.
