## Facts

- L.S. was born in 2001 to the mother and father.
- The family moved to Colorado in 2003; the parents separated in 2004, and the father moved to Nebraska.
- In May 2004, the parents signed a written agreement stating that custody matters would be under Colorado jurisdiction, L.S. would continue living in Colorado with the mother, and the father would have visitation.
- During a later Nebraska visit in 2004, the father refused to return L.S. to Colorado and filed for divorce and custody in Nebraska; the mother objected to Nebraska jurisdiction and filed for divorce in Colorado.
- The Colorado court dismissed the mother’s divorce petition due to the pending Nebraska divorce action, without resolving which state had custody jurisdiction.
- In 2006, a Nebraska court entered an initial custody determination awarding custody to the father, without first determining whether its jurisdiction satisfied the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA).
- The mother’s Nebraska appeal was dismissed, and Nebraska later issued an arrest warrant related to noncompliance with the Nebraska custody order.
- The mother filed an independent Colorado case seeking allocation of parental responsibilities; the Colorado trial court refused to recognize or enforce the Nebraska order, found Nebraska lacked jurisdiction, and awarded parental responsibilities to the mother.
- The Colorado Court of Appeals reversed, holding Colorado must give full faith and credit to Nebraska’s custody determination despite Nebraska’s lack of jurisdiction.
- The Colorado Supreme Court granted review to determine whether the PKPA required Colorado to recognize and enforce the Nebraska order.

## Issues

1. Whether the PKPA requires Colorado to give full faith and credit to Nebraska’s child custody determination when Nebraska did not exercise jurisdiction consistent with the PKPA.
2. Whether full faith and credit for interstate custody orders is conditioned on PKPA-compliant jurisdiction in the issuing state.

## Decision

- The Colorado Supreme Court reversed the Colorado Court of Appeals.
- The court held Colorado was not required to recognize or enforce Nebraska’s custody determination because Nebraska did not exercise jurisdiction in accordance with the PKPA.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion.

## Legal Principles

- The PKPA extends full faith and credit requirements to child custody determinations and supplies a federal rule of decision for interstate custody disputes.
- A state must enforce another state’s custody determination only if the issuing state exercised jurisdiction consistently with the PKPA. (28 U.S.C. § 1738A(c).)
- Full faith and credit is not automatic for custody orders; PKPA compliance is a prerequisite to mandatory recognition and enforcement by sister states.
- When an issuing state’s custody order is not PKPA-qualifying due to noncompliant jurisdiction, another state is not required to enforce it and may proceed to adjudicate custody under its own jurisdiction.

## Conclusion

Colorado was not obligated to enforce Nebraska’s custody order because Nebraska failed to establish PKPA-compliant jurisdiction; therefore, Colorado could proceed with its own allocation of parental responsibilities on remand.


In re Parental Responsibilities of L.S., 257 P.3d 201 (Colo. 2011)