North Dakota Code 14-14.1-18 – (207) Inconvenient forum
1. 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.
Terms Used In North Dakota Code 14-14.1-18
- Evidence: Information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case for one side or the other.
- Jurisdiction: (1) The legal authority of a court to hear and decide a case. Concurrent jurisdiction exists when two courts have simultaneous responsibility for the same case. (2) The geographic area over which the court has authority to decide cases.
- Litigation: A case, controversy, or lawsuit. Participants (plaintiffs and defendants) in lawsuits are called litigants.
- State: when applied to the different parts of the United States, includes the District of Columbia and the territories. See North Dakota Code 1-01-49
- Testimony: Evidence presented orally by witnesses during trials or before grand juries.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.