2020 Georgia Code
Title 19 - Domestic Relations
Chapter 9 - Child Custody Proceedings
Article 3 - Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act
Part 2 - Jurisdiction
§ 19-9-64. Temporary Emergency Jurisdiction; Continuing Effect; Communicating With Other Courts

1. A court of this state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child or a sibling or parent of the child is subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse.
2. If there is no previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this article and a child custody proceeding has not been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under Code Sections 19-9-61 through 19-9-63, a child custody determination made under this Code section remains in effect until an order is obtained from a court of a state having jurisdiction under Code Sections 19-9-61 through 19-9-63. If a child custody proceeding has not been or is not commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under Code Sections 19-9-61 through 19-9-63, a child custody determination made under this Code section becomes a final determination, if it so provides and this state becomes the home state of the child.
3. If there is a previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this article, or a child custody proceeding has been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under Code Sections 19-9-61 and 19-9-63, any order issued by a court of this state under this Code section must specify in the order a period that the court considers adequate to allow the person seeking an order to obtain an order from the state having jurisdiction under Code Sections 19-9-61 through 19-9-63. The order issued in this state remains in effect until an order is obtained from the other state within the period specified or the period expires.
4. A court of this state which has been asked to make a child custody determination under this Code section, upon being informed that a child custody proceeding has been commenced in, or a child custody determination has been made by, a court of a state having jurisdiction under Code Sections 19-9-61 through 19-9-63, shall immediately communicate with the other court. A court of this state which is exercising jurisdiction pursuant to Code Sections 19-9-61 through 19-9-63, upon being informed that a child custody proceeding has been commenced in, or a child custody determination has been made by, a court of another state under a statute similar to this Code section, shall immediately communicate with the court of that state to resolve the emergency, protect the safety of the parties and the child, and determine a period for the duration of the temporary order.

(Code 1981, §19-9-64, enacted by Ga. L. 2001, p. 129, § 1.)

- For annual survey on domestic relations law, see 68 Mercer L. Rev. 107 (2016).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Custody can only be relitigated where legal custodian resides.

- Trial court erred by granting a parent's complaint for modification of child custody and support and changing custody, which was filed in that parent's county of residence, as that county was not the jurisdiction wherein the issue of custody and support was originally litigated and the opposing parent never waived the challenge to the jurisdiction of the trial court via a pro se letter, which merely acknowledged receipt of the complaint; as a result, the judgment granting the change of custody was reversed and the case was remanded to the trial court with directions for the trial court to transfer the case to the trial court of the proper county. Hatch v. Hatch, 287 Ga. App. 832, 652 S.E.2d 874 (2007).

- Trial court had temporary emergency jurisdiction in a child custody case because the children were visiting the father in Walker County, which was the location of the trial court, when the order was issued, and the trial court found that the children had been subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse; these were the only two requirements for temporary emergency jurisdiction under O.C.G.A. § 19-9-64. Taylor v. Curl, 298 Ga. App. 45, 679 S.E.2d 80 (2009).

- Trial court erred by exercising temporary emergency jurisdiction after the child's mother died since the circumstances and well-being of the child, who was in the physical custody of the child's uncle and in no immediate danger, did not demand immediate action. Prabnarong v. Oudomhack, 334 Ga. App. 723, 780 S.E.2d 393 (2015).

- When a father made threatening telephone calls from another state to a mother and to their child, a trial court could properly decline to exercise jurisdiction under O.C.G.A. § 19-9-64(a) of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-9-40 et seq., and under the similar jurisdictional provisions of the Parental Kidnapping and Prevention Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1738A, because the child was in no immediate danger as the child continued to be in the mother's custody so there was no true emergency requiring a Georgia court to exercise jurisdiction for the child's protection. Anderson v. Deas, 273 Ga. App. 770, 615 S.E.2d 859 (2005).

In a child custody case between parents who had been living in Michigan but were visiting the wife's parents in Georgia for Thanksgiving, even if there was no basis for emergency jurisdiction under O.C.G.A. § 19-9-64, given that no other state had a pending custody petition before it, the trial court properly considered whether the court had jurisdiction under O.C.G.A. § 19-9-61. Bowman v. Bowman, Ga. App. , S.E.2d (Mar. 6, 2018).

Cited in Baca v. Baca, 256 Ga. App. 514, 568 S.E.2d 746 (2002); Delgado v. Combs, 314 Ga. App. 419, 724 S.E.2d 436 (2012); Black v. Black, 292 Ga. 691, 740 S.E.2d 613 (2013); Plummer v. Plummer, 305 Ga. 23, 823 S.E.2d 258 (2019).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Construction and application of uniform child custody jurisdiction and enforcement act's temporary emergency jurisdiction provision, 53 A.L.R.6th 419.