Washington Code 26.27.491 – Hearing and order
Current as of: 2023 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
(1) Unless the court issues a temporary emergency order pursuant to RCW 26.27.231, upon a finding that a petitioner is entitled to immediate physical custody of the child, the court shall order that the petitioner may take immediate physical custody of the child unless the respondent establishes that:
Terms Used In Washington Code 26.27.491
- Answer: The formal written statement by a defendant responding to a civil complaint and setting forth the grounds for defense.
- Jurisdiction: (1) The legal authority of a court to hear and decide a case. Concurrent jurisdiction exists when two courts have simultaneous responsibility for the same case. (2) The geographic area over which the court has authority to decide cases.
- Testify: Answer questions in court.
- Testimony: Evidence presented orally by witnesses during trials or before grand juries.
(a) The child custody determination has not been registered and confirmed under RCW 26.27.441 and that:
(i) The issuing court did not have jurisdiction under Article 2;
(ii) The child custody determination for which enforcement is sought has been vacated, stayed, or modified by a court of a state having jurisdiction to do so under Article 2; or
(iii) The respondent was entitled to notice, but notice was not given in accordance with the standards of RCW 26.27.081, in the proceedings before the court that issued the order for which enforcement is sought; or
(b) The child custody determination for which enforcement is sought was registered and confirmed under RCW 26.27.441 but has been vacated, stayed, or modified by a court of a state having jurisdiction to do so under Article 2.
(2) The court shall award the fees, costs, and expenses authorized under RCW 26.27.511 and may grant additional relief, including a request for the assistance of law enforcement officials, and set a further hearing to determine whether additional relief is appropriate.
(3) If a party called to testify refuses to answer on the ground that the testimony may be self-incriminating, the court may draw an adverse inference from the refusal.
(4) A privilege against disclosure of communications between spouses and a defense of immunity based on the relationship of husband and wife or parent and child may not be invoked in a proceeding under this article.
[ 2001 c 65 § 310.]