Gill v. Gill (child Custody)

Summary

The court held that Nevada had home-state jurisdiction over the child's custody proceeding because the child's stay in Canada before the Nevada filing was a temporary absence and the child had therefore lived in Nevada for the required six-month period. The court further held that the prior Hague determination concerning habitual residence did not eliminate Nevada's jurisdiction, although it could support declining jurisdiction in favor of Canada under the inconvenient-forum provisions. Because the Canadian court had not resolved its own jurisdiction and the parties had not adequately briefed the forum issue, the court reversed and remanded, directing the district court to address custody and support together. No separate opinions were filed.