## Facts

- Tammie J.C. and Robert T.R. married in Wyoming in 1987. Tammie had a daughter from a prior marriage, and Tammie and Robert had a son, Thomas, in 1988.
- In 1991 the family moved to Arizona.
- In 1992 Tammie’s daughter accused Robert of sexual assault. Tammie left Arizona with her daughter and Thomas and returned to Wyoming.
- Robert was convicted of sexual assault in Arizona and sentenced to ten years in an Arizona prison.
- Robert filed for divorce in Arizona. The Arizona court granted Tammie sole custody of Thomas and denied Robert visitation rights.
- Tammie later moved to Wisconsin (settling there in 1996) and remarried her daughter’s biological father.
- In 2000 Tammie filed a Wisconsin petition to terminate Robert’s parental rights, and her husband petitioned to adopt Thomas.
- Robert received notice and moved to delay the trial until he was released from prison. The Wisconsin circuit court granted the delay.
- Robert then moved to dismiss, arguing Wisconsin lacked personal jurisdiction because he had never been to Wisconsin and had no contacts with the state.
- The Wisconsin court gave the parties time to address jurisdiction in Arizona. The Arizona court declined to exercise jurisdiction because Thomas was not present in Arizona.
- The Wisconsin circuit court proceeded to trial; Robert participated by telephone from prison. The circuit court terminated Robert’s parental rights after finding termination was in Thomas’s best interests.
- Robert appealed. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals reversed, concluding Wisconsin lacked personal jurisdiction over Robert.
- Tammie sought review.

## Issues

1. Whether a Wisconsin court must have personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state parent to enter an order terminating that parent’s rights when the child resides in Wisconsin and the parent receives notice and an opportunity to be heard.

## Decision

- The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals.
- The court held that personal jurisdiction over Robert was not required because termination of parental rights is a determination of legal status that a state may adjudicate based on the child’s residence within the state, so long as due process notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard are provided.
- The circuit court’s termination order was reinstated.

## Legal Principles

- A court may adjudicate certain “status” matters—such as the legal relationship between parent and child—without obtaining personal jurisdiction over an absent, nonresident parent, when the forum has a strong connection to the child (including the child’s residence) and the parent receives constitutionally adequate notice.
- The Due Process Clause requires notice reasonably calculated to inform the parent of the proceeding and a fair chance to participate; it does not always require the parent’s minimum contacts with the forum when the judgment primarily determines status rather than imposing a personal money judgment.
- A parent’s lack of physical presence in the forum state does not, by itself, bar a termination proceeding when the child’s life is centered in the forum and the parent is afforded an opportunity to be heard (including by telephone participation where appropriate).

## Conclusion

In *In re Termination of Parental Rights to Thomas J.S.*, the Wisconsin Supreme Court concluded that Wisconsin could terminate an out-of-state father’s parental rights even though he lacked contacts with Wisconsin, because the proceeding determined the child-parent legal status and Wisconsin had a strong connection through the child’s residence; with proper notice and a real opportunity for the father to participate, personal jurisdiction was not a prerequisite.


In re Termination of Parental Rights to Thomas J.S., 262 Wis. 2d 217 (2003)