Virginia Code 64.2-2110: Appropriate forum
A. A court of the Commonwealth having jurisdiction under § 64.2-2107 to appoint a guardian or issue a conservatorship order may decline to exercise its jurisdiction if it determines at any time that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum.
Terms Used In Virginia Code 64.2-2110
- 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.
- Guardian: A person legally empowered and charged with the duty of taking care of and managing the property of another person who because of age, intellect, or health, is incapable of managing his (her) own affairs.
- 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.
- State: when applied to a part of the United States, includes any of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands. See Virginia Code 1-245
B. If a court of the Commonwealth declines to exercise its jurisdiction under subsection A, it shall either dismiss or stay the proceeding. The court may impose any condition the court considers just and proper, including the condition that a petition for the appointment of a guardian or issuance of a conservatorship order be filed promptly in another state.
C. In determining whether it is an appropriate forum, the court shall consider all relevant factors, including:
1. Any expressed preference of the respondent;
2. Whether abuse, neglect, or exploitation of the respondent has occurred or is likely to occur and which state could best protect the respondent from the abuse, neglect, or exploitation;
3. The length of time the respondent was physically present in or was a legal resident of the Commonwealth or another state;
4. The distance of the respondent from the court in each state;
5. The financial circumstances of the respondent’s estate;
6. The nature and location of the evidence;
7. The ability of the court in each state to decide the issue expeditiously and the procedures necessary to present evidence;
8. The familiarity of the court of each state with the facts and issues in the proceeding; and
9. If an appointment were made, the court’s ability to monitor the conduct of the guardian or conservator.