Sidell v. Sidell

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that parties cannot confer subject matter jurisdiction on a court when jurisdiction is otherwise lacking
• holding that parties cannot confer subject matter jurisdiction on a court when jurisdiction is otherwise lacking
• finding \the authority to enforce a child-support order is permissive\ where the issuing court retains jurisdiction to enforce the order after parties moved out of state
• rejecting the argument that the parties may agree in a settlement document that a state remain the child's home state for purposes of the UCCJEA and, therefore, retain exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over future custody matters
• rejecting the argument that the decree state remained the children's \home state\ and retained continuing jurisdiction over future custody disputes based on an agreement in the marital settlement agreement; \litigants may not vest the Family Court with jurisdiction by agreement or otherwise\
• rejecting the argument that the decree state remained the children’s ‘ ‘home state” and retained continuing jurisdiction over future custody disputes based on an agreement in the marital settlement agreement; “litigants may not vest the Family Court with jurisdiction by agreement or otherwise”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).