Section 2–205. Continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify child support order.
(a) A tribunal of the commonwealth that has issued a child support order consistent with the law of the commonwealth has and shall exercise continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify its child support order if the order is the controlling order and:
(1) at the time of the filing of a request for modification the commonwealth is the residence of the obligor, the individual obligee or the child for whose benefit the support order is issued; or
(2) even if the commonwealth is not the residence of the obligor, the individual obligee or the child for whose benefit the support order is issued, the parties consent in a record or in open court that the tribunal of the commonwealth may continue to exercise jurisdiction to modify its order.
(b) A tribunal of the commonwealth that has issued a child support order consistent with the law of the commonwealth may not exercise continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify the order if:
(1) all of the parties who are individuals file consent in a record with the tribunal of the commonwealth that a tribunal of another state that has jurisdiction over at least 1 of the parties who is an individual or that is located in the state of residence of the child may modify the order and assume continuing, exclusive jurisdiction; or;
(2) its order is not the controlling order.
(c) If a tribunal of another state has issued a child support order pursuant to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act or a law substantially similar to that Act which modifies a child support order of a tribunal of the commonwealth, tribunals of the commonwealth shall recognize the continuing, exclusive jurisdiction of the tribunal of the other state.
(d) A tribunal of the commonwealth that lacks continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify a child support order may serve as an initiating tribunal to request a tribunal of another state to modify a support order issued in that state.
(e) A temporary support order issued ex parte or pending resolution of a jurisdictional conflict does not create continuing, exclusive jurisdiction in the issuing tribunal.
Copyright ©2024 LegalFix. All rights reserved. LegalFix is not a law firm, is not licensed to practice law, and does not provide legal advice, services, or representation. The information on this website is an overview of the legal plans you can purchase—or that may be provided by your employer as an employee benefit or by your credit union or other membership group as a membership benefit.
LegalFix provides its members with easy access to affordable legal services through a network of independent law firms. LegalFix, its corporate entity, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, and contractors do not provide legal advice, services, or representation—directly or indirectly.
The articles and information on the site are not legal advice and should not be relied upon—they are for information purposes only. You should become a LegalFix member to get legal services from one of our network law firms.
You should not disclose confidential or potentially incriminating information to LegalFix—you should only communicate such information to your network law firm.
The benefits and legal services described in the LegalFix legal plans are not always available in all states or with all plans. See the legal plan Benefit Overview and the more comprehensive legal plan contract during checkout for coverage details in your state.
Use of this website, the purchase of legal plans, and access to the LegalFix networks of law firms are subject to the LegalFix Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.