• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer navigation
  • Washington, D.C.
  • melissa@mkfamily.law
  • (202) 713-5165
  • mkfamily.law
Family Law Across Borders

Family Law Across Borders

International Family Law Resources

  • About MKFL
  • Websites
  • Blog
  • FAQ
  • Articles
  • Books
  • Videos
  • Events
  • Contact

Case Update (2021): Greenbank v. Vanzant, loss of continuing exclusive jurisdiction, interplay with grandparent visitation

Case Update (2021): Greenbank v. Vanzant, loss of continuing exclusive jurisdiction, interplay with grandparent visitation

April 6, 2021

On March 9, 2021, the Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed its trial court in Greenbank v. Vanzant.  

Ms. Vanzant, the paternal grandmother of the child at issue, negotiated a Visitation Agreement with Ms. Greenbank, the child’s mother and only living parent.  That Visitation Agreement was approved and entered as a court order.   The Visitation Agreement gave Ms. Vanzant visitation, including continued visitation if Ms. Greenbank moved to Canada with the child.  It also required Ms. Greenbank to give Ms. Vanzant at least 14 days notice before moving to Canada.  A few days later, Ms. Greenbank moved to BC, Canada without any notice,  and refused to comply with the Visitation Agreement.  She failed to appear at a Superior Court hearing about her non-compliance.  A warrant was issued for her arrest.

In 2013, Ms. Vanzant sought to domesticate the Visitation Agreement/Order in BC, but her application was dismissed in 2014, after the Canadian court concluded that it was “contrary to public policy in British Columbia”  because of weeklong annual visits between the child and grandmother in Arizona when the child had not seen its grandmother in 2 years, and because Ms. Greenbank was unable to bring the child to Arizona due to the arrest warrant. In 2018, Ms. Greenback filed a family court action in BC, and Ms. Vanzant filed a “jurisdictional response.”  The BC Court accepted jurisdiction and entered an order allowing only limited supervised visits between Ms. Vanzant and the grandchild.  There continued to be arrest warrants and contempt proceedings in Arizona, which Ms. Greenback then sought to dismiss on the basis that Canada took up jurisdiction.  In April 2020, the Superior Court agreed with Ms. Greenback, dismissed the matter with prejudice, quashed the civil arrest warrant, and deemed Arizona to have lost exclusive, continuing jurisdiction.

Arizona had exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over the custody matter, pursuant to the UCCJEA until either of the following became true:

1. neither the child, nor the child and one parent, nor the child and a person acting as a parent have a significant connection with Arizona, and substantial evidence is no longer available in Arizona; or

2. the Arizona court or the Canadian courts determine that the child, the child’s parents and any person acting as a parent do not presently reside in Arizona.

The Canadian court concluded that the child and its only living parent resided in Canada for the better part of 7 years, and therefore it had jurisdiction.  Therefore, Arizona concluded it lost CEJ. The UCCJEA grants no jurisdictional protections for grandparents or third parties who are not acting as parents.

Category iconacting as a parent,  Canada,  continuing exclusive jurisdiction,  grandparent visitation,  person acting as a parent,  third party custody,  UCCJEA

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe

Join 108 others, and get a notification to our new posts right on your inbox.

We promise we’ll never spam! Only notifications of new posts.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

The use of the name MK Family Law is protected as are the logo and content of this website. The information is provided by MK Family Law and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

© 2023 · MK Family Law · All Rights Reserved · Developed by RDK

  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Attorney Advertising