New York Court Discusses Jurisdiction Over Custody Cases

In interstate and international custody disputes, even the most urgent requests can be denied if the court lacks proper jurisdiction over a parent. In other words, procedural rules governing service of process and notice are not mere technicalities but fundamental safeguards that ensure fairness and due process. A recent New York decision demonstrates how failures in service can invalidate custody orders entirely, even after a court has granted sole custody by default. If you are involved in a custody dispute that crosses state or international borders, it is critical to consult an experienced New York family law attorney before taking action that could later be vacated.

History of the Case

It is reported that the parties are the parents of a child subject to a prior custody order issued in another state, which granted the mother primary custody. Allegedly, the father later filed a petition in New York Family Court seeking to modify that out-of-state custody order and obtain sole legal and physical custody of the child. The mother was living outside the United States at the time the petition was filed.

Allegedly, the Family Court granted the father’s petition on default after authorizing service on the mother by email and directing the initiation of international service. The court awarded the father sole legal and physical custody of the child without visitation to the mother. It is alleged that the mother later moved to dismiss the proceeding and vacate the custody order, arguing that the court never acquired personal jurisdiction over her due to improper service. The Family Court denied that motion, and the mother appealed.

Appellate Review and Legal Analysis

Reportedly, the Appellate Division reversed, holding that the Family Court lacked personal jurisdiction over the mother from the outset. The appellate court explained that under New York law, when a parent resides outside the state, service must comply with specific statutory requirements designed to ensure actual notice. Courts may only authorize alternative methods of service, such as email, after finding that personal service or service by mail is impracticable.

It is alleged that the father failed to demonstrate that personal service or service by mail with a return receipt was impracticable. As a result, the order authorizing service by email did not comply with statutory requirements, and the email service that followed was legally insufficient. The appellate court emphasized that actual notice alone does not cure defective service and cannot confer jurisdiction where statutory methods are not followed.

It is reported that the father also claimed the mother was personally served abroad, but the record contained no valid proof of service. Without an affidavit of service or other legally acceptable evidence, the court concluded that lawful service was never established. Because personal jurisdiction was lacking, the appellate court ruled that all prior orders, including the award of sole custody to the father, were null and void and dismissed the matter in its entirety.

Talk to a Skilled New York Child Custody Attorney

Custody disputes involving parents in different states require strict adherence to jurisdictional and service requirements. If you are seeking to modify a child custody order or defending against one involving service, jurisdiction, or international issues, it is in your best interest to talk to an attorney. Attorney Ksenia Rudyuk of Rudyuk Law Firm has extensive experience handling complex custody and jurisdictional disputes and can help protect your rights at every stage. To schedule a consultation, contact Rudyuk Law Firm at (212) 706-2001 or complete our online form.