## Facts

- A minor child’s custody and care became contested among relatives following the mother’s death or absence.
- Competing proceedings occurred in Kansas and Oklahoma concerning authority over the child.
- In Kansas, the child’s natural father sought appointment of his designees (paternal aunt and uncle) as guardians and conservators.
- The child’s maternal aunt and uncle sought dismissal for lack of Kansas jurisdiction and sought enforcement/recognition of Oklahoma custody determinations, including registration of an Oklahoma custody decree.
- The Kansas district court exercised jurisdiction, appointed the father’s designees as guardians and conservators, denied the maternal relatives’ jurisdiction/enforcement motion, and cancelled registration of the Oklahoma decree.
- The maternal relatives appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), as in effect before July 1, 2000, applied to Kansas minor guardianship proceedings so as to limit Kansas subject-matter jurisdiction.
2. Whether Kansas’s 2000 enactment of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) and amendment to K.S.A. 59-3009 clarified existing law or changed it.
3. Whether the district court properly exercised jurisdiction to appoint guardians/conservators and properly declined to enforce or register Oklahoma custody orders.

## Decision

- The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the district court.
- The court held the pre-2000 UCCJA did not apply to Kansas guardianship/conservatorship proceedings for a minor.
- The court held the 2000 adoption of the UCCJEA and amendment to K.S.A. 59-3009 constituted a change in Kansas law, confirming guardianships previously were outside the UCCJA framework.
- The court upheld the Kansas court’s jurisdiction to appoint the father’s designees and its refusal to enforce/register the Oklahoma decree in these proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- Legislative intent controls statutory interpretation when ascertainable from the statutory text and structure.
- When the legislature amends an existing statute, the amendment is presumed to change prior law rather than merely restate it.
- Absent express statutory incorporation, Kansas minor guardianship/conservatorship proceedings (pre-July 1, 2000) were not governed by UCCJA jurisdictional rules applicable to child-custody proceedings.
- Under the pre-2000 statutory scheme, Kansas courts could exercise subject-matter jurisdiction over minor guardianship/conservatorship appointments notwithstanding out-of-state custody orders, and could decline registration/enforcement in that procedural setting.

## Conclusion

The Kansas Supreme Court held that, before July 1, 2000, Kansas minor guardianship proceedings were not controlled by the UCCJA; the later UCCJEA-related amendments changed Kansas law. Accordingly, the Kansas court properly exercised jurisdiction to appoint the father’s designees as guardians and conservators and properly declined to enforce or register the Oklahoma custody decree.


Ward v. Ward, 272 Kan. 12, 30 P.3d 1001 (Kan. 2001)