## Facts

- The parents married in West Virginia, lived there, and had three children.
- In October 1983, the mother filed for divorce in the Circuit Court of Wood County, West Virginia, seeking temporary and permanent legal and physical custody.
- During a November 1983 visitation, the father did not return the children, abducted them, and concealed their whereabouts from the mother.
- In May 1985, the West Virginia court granted a divorce on one-year separation grounds; the decree did not address child custody.
- While the West Virginia custody matter remained unresolved, the father took the children to Florida and filed a custody action there seeking permanent custody.
- The West Virginia family law master notified the Florida court of the pending West Virginia custody proceeding.
- The West Virginia circuit court determined West Virginia was the children’s home state when the custody proceeding commenced (and also a significant-connection state) and awarded the mother permanent custody.
- The Florida court concluded Florida had become the home state, declined to accord full faith and credit to the West Virginia order under the PKPA, and treated the father’s abduction as not controlling for jurisdictional purposes.

## Issues

1. Whether a state that was the children’s home state when a custody proceeding commenced retains home-state jurisdiction under the UCCJA and PKPA for a reasonable time when a parent abducts and conceals the children in another state.
2. Whether the circuit court could properly award permanent custody on the existing record, or whether a full evidentiary hearing on the children’s best interests was required.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed West Virginia’s exercise of subject-matter jurisdiction under the UCCJA and PKPA.
- The court held that home-state status does not automatically end after six months when a parent has wrongfully removed and concealed the children; it persists for a reasonable period of time.
- The court reversed the award of permanent legal custody to the mother and remanded for a full evidentiary hearing to determine custody based on the children’s best interests.

## Legal Principles

- When a custody proceeding is commenced in a state that is the children’s home state, that state retains home-state jurisdiction for a reasonable time even if a parent abducts and conceals the children elsewhere.
- A rigid six-month approach to home-state status is inappropriate where concealment would allow the abducting parent to manufacture jurisdiction in the asylum state.
- The UCCJA and PKPA should be read consistently to deter child-snatching, reduce interstate jurisdictional competition, and prevent jurisdictional manipulation through wrongful removal or retention.
- Permanent custody determinations must rest on an adequate evidentiary record applying the best-interests-of-the-children standard; misconduct affecting jurisdiction does not eliminate the need for a full custody hearing.

## Conclusion

West Virginia remained the proper forum to decide custody because it was the home state when the proceeding began and retained that status for a reasonable time despite the father’s abduction and concealment, but the permanent custody award was vacated and remanded for a complete best-interests evidentiary hearing.


Sams v. Boston, 384 S.E.2d 151 (W. Va. 1989)