USA – OKLAHOMA Law and Practice Contributed by: Danya Bundy and Aaron Bundy, Bundy Law
3. Child Law 3.1 Choice of Jurisdiction
their matter to be heard by an arbitrator. The rules governing arbitration include the right to counsel and the right to conduct discovery. Arbitration can be a powerful tool to ensure privacy and to provide scheduling flexibility and controls to both sides and their counsel. In many cases, an arbitrator may hear and decide a contested mat - ter months before a public judicial officer would be able to hear it. Once an arbitration decision is issued, either party may apply for a court to confirm the award and make it an enforceable order of the court. Parties to an arbitration also have the right to appeal. Oklahoma family law statutes give family courts the ability to require parties to attend mediation. Penalties for non-compliance could range from financial sanctions, an award of attorney fees to the compliant party, or even contempt of court. Agreements reached by parties privately, wheth - er through mediation or simply between them - selves, are enforceable. Appellate courts have developed the law and provided trial courts with guidance and an analysis for determining the propriety of enforcing a settlement agreement when one side wishes to renege after making the deal. A settlement agreement should not be approved unless it is fair, just and reasonable. In considering whether a divorce settlement agree - ment is fair and reasonable, the trial court must look beyond the terms of the agreement and consider the relationship between the parties at the time of trial, their ages, health, financial con - ditions, opportunities, and contribution of each to the joint estate.
Oklahoma has adopted the Uniform Child Custo - dy Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), which applies to all matters involving minor chil - dren. The UCCJEA gives Oklahoma the authority to make an initial child custody determination only in specific circumstances, as follows: • “[t]his state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the pro - ceeding, or was the home state of the child within six months before the commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from this state, but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this state; • [a] court of another state does not have jurisdiction under paragraph 1 of this subsec - tion, or a court of the home state of the child has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this state is the more appropri - ate forum under Section 19 or 20 of this Act[,] and: (a) the child and the child’s parents, or the child and at least one parent or a person acting as a parent, have a significant con - nection with this state other than mere physical presence; and (b) substantial evidence is available in this state concerning the child’s care, protec - tion, training, and personal relationships; • [a]ll courts having jurisdiction under para - graph 1 or 2 of this subsection have declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a court of this state is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child under Section 19 or 20 of this Act; or • no court of any other state would have juris - diction under the criteria specified in para - graph 1, 2, or 3 of this subsection”.
470 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook