Croke v. Huyck

Full title: JOHN CROKE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. MELISSA ANN HUYCK, Respondent-Appellee

Court: Court of Appeals of Iowa

Date published: Mar 16, 2005

697 N.W.2d 128 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 5-172 / 04-1115.

March 16, 2005.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Kristin L. Hibbs, Judge.

John Croke appeals the dismissal of his action to modify custody. AFFIRMED.

John Croke, Iowa City, appellant pro se.

Karen Egerton of Stein, Moreland, Moore Egerton, L.L.P., Iowa City, for appellee.

Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Miller and Eisenhauer, JJ.

EISENHAUER, J.

John Croke and Melissa Huyck have two children. In 2001, an Iowa court granted Melissa sole custody of the children and granted supervised visitation to John, but only in Maryland (where the children were then residing with their mother) and only after he obtained a psychological evaluation. After striking the requirement for a psychological evaluation, we affirmed the custody award. Huyck v. Croke, 01-1598 (Iowa Ct.App. Mar. 12, 2003). In March 2004, John filed a petition to modify custody. Melissa successfully filed a motion to dismiss under Iowa Code chapter 598B (2003). John appeals. After our de novo review, In re Marriage of Hubbard, 315 N.W.2d 75, 77 (Iowa 1982), we affirm.

Melissa and the children have lived in Maryland since August 2000. They no longer have significant ties to Iowa. All information concerning the children's wellbeing is in Maryland. In John's modification application, he refers to problems with the children's schooling and with their neighborhood. That information, as well as all other information pertinent to John's alleged grounds for modification, is in Maryland. Any evidence remaining in Iowa concerning the children's wellbeing is insubstantial. Thus, Iowa lacks "exclusive, continuing jurisdiction" to modify the 2001 order. Iowa Code § 598B.202(1)(a).

As Iowa lacks "exclusive, continuing jurisdiction," an Iowa court may only modify the 2001 order if it would have jurisdiction to make an initial custody determination. Id. § 598B.202(2). Here, it does not. Iowa is no longer the children's "home state," see id. § 598B.102(7) (defining "home state"), and none of the other bases to make an initial custody determination exist in the present case. Id. § 598B.201.

Iowa no longer has jurisdiction to determine custody of the parties' children. The trial court correctly granted Melissa's motion to dismiss. We have considered all issues argued by the parties and affirm the judgment of the district court.

AFFIRMED.