Utah Court of Appeals
What averments are required to register foreign child custody orders under the UCCJEA? Parrish v. Wyttenbach Explained
Summary
Wyttenbach sought to register a Texas child custody order in Utah under the UCCJEA, but failed to include required averments including a statement that the order had not been modified. The district court denied registration, and Wyttenbach appealed arguing he could not have disclosed a later August 2009 Texas order in his April 2009 filing.
Practice Areas & Topics
Analysis
Background and Facts
This case originated in Texas when Ranita Parrish sought dissolution of a common-law marriage and custody adjudication involving her children with William Wyttenbach. In April 2009, Wyttenbach filed an application to register a May 2008 Texas custody order in Utah. However, after Wyttenbach’s filing, the Texas court held a hearing in July 2009, resulting in an August 2009 order that found Wyttenbach in contempt and modified his contact with the children. Wyttenbach then filed a September 2009 addendum requesting Utah invoke jurisdiction under the UCCJEA, but failed to mention the August 2009 Texas modification.
Key Legal Issues
The central issue was whether Wyttenbach properly complied with the UCCJEA requirements for registering a foreign child custody determination. The UCCJEA imposes additional requirements beyond the general Utah Foreign Judgment Act, including specific averments about the status of the foreign order.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Utah Court of Appeals reviewed the district court’s statutory interpretation for correctness. The court held that under Utah Code section 78B-13-305(1)(b), a party seeking registration must submit “a statement under penalty of perjury that to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person seeking registration the order has not been modified.” Wyttenbach undeniably failed to include this required averment and could not have truthfully made such a statement given the August 2009 Texas modification. The court rejected Wyttenbach’s argument that he was being faulted for failing to disclose something impossible to know, clarifying that the district court’s decision was based on his failure to make the required averments.
Practice Implications
This decision emphasizes the importance of strict compliance with UCCJEA requirements when registering foreign child custody determinations. Practitioners must ensure all required averments are included, particularly the truthful statement that the order has not been modified. The court also awarded attorney fees on appeal under the UCCJEA’s prevailing party provision, demonstrating that fee awards can extend to appellate proceedings when initially authorized by statute.
Case Details
Case Name
Parrish v. Wyttenbach
Citation
2014 UT App 181
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 20130362-CA
Date Decided
July 31, 2014
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
A party seeking to register a foreign child custody determination under the UCCJEA must include a statement under penalty of perjury that the order has not been modified, and failure to make this required averment warrants denial of registration.
Standard of Review
Correctness for statutory interpretation under the UCCJEA
Practice Tip
When registering foreign child custody determinations under the UCCJEA, ensure all required averments are included, particularly the statement under penalty of perjury that the order has not been modified.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.