PARENTAL KIDNAPPING PREVENTION ACT OF 1980 (PKPA) AND ITS IMPACT ON CHILD CUSTODY IN NORFOLK, VA

MONTAGNA KLEIN CAMDEN LLP

425 MONTICELLO AVENUE

NORFOLK, VA 23510

Tony-Montagna

Anthony Montagna and his partners are  child custody lawyers in Norfolk, VA

HELPING GOOD PEOPLE WITH CHILD CUSTODY CASES SINCE 1993

MILITARY, UNION, POLICE, FIREFIGHTER, TEACHER, AND SENIOR DISCOUNTS

THOUSANDS OF SATISFIED CLIENTS

150 + YEARS OF COMBINED LEGAL EXPERIENCE AT MONTAGNA KLEIN CAMDEN L.L.P.

If you have a custody case and are looking for experienced child custody lawyers in Norfolk, VA, contact Montagna Klein Camden today. We are located at 425 Monticello Avenue, Norfolk, VA 23510 and are minutes away from the Norfolk Circuit Court and Norfolk Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court. Our phone number is 757-625-3500.

With Anthony L. Montagna, III, you can be confident that you have an experienced, professional child custody attorney on your side for your custody battle in Norfolk, Virginia.  We invite you to read Anthony’s 5 Star reviews on google.

Anthony will fight to protect you and your family. He knows that every case is important to you, and he will battle for you in court.  As child custody lawyers in Norfolk, VA, Anthony and his partners have had  countless satisfied clients.  Most importantly, Anthony frequently receives five star reviews on google and other rating sites.

THE PKPA:

§1738A. Full faith and credit given to child custody determinations

(a) The appropriate authorities of every State shall enforce according to its terms, and shall not modify except as provided in subsections (f), (g), and (h) of this section, any custody determination or visitation determination made consistently with the provisions of this section by a court of another State.

(b) As used in this section, the term-

(1) “child” means a person under the age of eighteen;

(2) “contestant” means a person, including a parent or grandparent, who claims a right to custody or visitation of a child;

(3) “custody determination” means a judgment, decree, or other order of a court providing for the custody of a child, and includes permanent and temporary orders, and initial orders and modifications;

(4) “home State” means the State in which, immediately preceding the time involved, the child lived with his parents, a parent, or a person acting as parent, for at least six consecutive months, and in the case of a child less than six months old, the State in which the child lived from birth with any of such persons. Periods of temporary absence of any of such persons are counted as part of the six-month or other period;

(5) “modification” and “modify” refer to a custody or visitation determination which modifies, replaces, supersedes, or otherwise is made subsequent to, a prior custody or visitation determination concerning the same child, whether made by the same court or not;

(6) “person acting as a parent” means a person, other than a parent, who has physical custody of a child and who has either been awarded custody by a court or claims a right to custody;

(7) “physical custody” means actual possession and control of a child;

(8) “State” means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a territory or possession of the United States; and

(9) “visitation determination” means a judgment, decree, or other order of a court providing for the visitation of a child and includes permanent and temporary orders and initial orders and modifications.

(c) A child custody or visitation determination made by a court of a State is consistent with the provisions of this section only if-

(1) such court has jurisdiction under the law of such State; and

(2) one of the following conditions is met:

(A) such State (i) is the home State of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or (ii) had been the child’s home State within six months before the date of the commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from such State because of his removal or retention by a contestant or for other reasons, and a contestant continues to live in such State;

(B)(i) it appears that no other State would have jurisdiction under subparagraph (A), and (ii) it is in the best interest of the child that a court of such State assume jurisdiction because (I) the child and his parents, or the child and at least one contestant, have a significant connection with such State other than mere physical presence in such State, and (II) there is available in such State substantial evidence concerning the child’s present or future care, protection, training, and personal relationships;

(C) the child is physically present in such State and (i) the child has been abandoned, or (ii) it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, a sibling, or parent of the child has been subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse;

(D)(i) it appears that no other State would have jurisdiction under subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (E), or another State has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that the State whose jurisdiction is in issue is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody or visitation of the child, and (ii) it is in the best interest of the child that such court assume jurisdiction; or

(E) the court has continuing jurisdiction pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.

(d) The jurisdiction of a court of a State which has made a child custody or visitation determination consistently with the provisions of this section continues as long as the requirement of subsection (c)(1) of this section continues to be met and such State remains the residence of the child or of any contestant.

(e) Before a child custody or visitation determination is made, reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard shall be given to the contestants, any parent whose parental rights have not been previously terminated and any person who has physical custody of a child.

(f) A court of a State may modify a determination of the custody of the same child made by a court of another State, if-

(1) it has jurisdiction to make such a child custody determination; and

(2) the court of the other State no longer has jurisdiction, or it has declined to exercise such jurisdiction to modify such determination.

(g) A court of a State shall not exercise jurisdiction in any proceeding for a custody or visitation determination commenced during the pendency of a proceeding in a court of another State where such court of that other State is exercising jurisdiction consistently with the provisions of this section to make a custody or visitation determination.

(h) A court of a State may not modify a visitation determination made by a court of another State unless the court of the other State no longer has jurisdiction to modify such determination or has declined to exercise jurisdiction to modify such determination.

PURPOSE OF PKPA:

  1. To assure full faith and credit is given in child custody determinations
  2. To allow for the availability of federal resources in parental kidnapping cases with international or interstate flight.
Contact Us

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Call Now

A Few of the Clients We Have Helped

  • "Mr. Montagna was the BEST!! I had reckless driving and 2 seatbelt violations ( one for a minor) and he got my whole case DISMISSED!! He is definitely the go to guy for your case… I couldn’t appreciate and thank him enough!"

    Sky B.
  • "Simply the best in the business. Got my 67 in a 35 mph reduced from reckless driving to an improper driving. He let me know what to do before court and I followed everything exactly. Would highly recommend him for any traffic case."

    Wesley F.
  • "Mr. Anthony Montagna understood the assignment! I am so glad I retained him. He is very professional, understanding, attentive, and easy to reach. He will make sure you get the best results as possible. Thank again Mr. Anthony and Kelly for taking care of me and serving me at my best. If anybody is thinking about looking into this law firm, please look no further!"

    Tiara S.
  • "I had a speeding ticket that was 21 over in a 30mph zone. He got my case dismissed. Whatever he asked you to get for court definitely get the paperwork. I really appreciate Anthony Montana for making my driving record go back to +5. He really knows the law and he is definitely an attorney I will use later in life if I will need him again. He does care about the people he helps in court."

    Jacob P.
  • "Mr. Montagna handles my periodic traffic offenses and always gets them dismissed. Depending on the charge he has had me take a driver improvement class, which was actually enjoyable, and my charges are always dismissed. I would never use anybody else for any kind of traffic offense. The cops seem to know him and the bailiff told me one time that I had chosen a good lawyer. Highly recommended."

    Cindy Williams
  • "Anthony helped me with a traffic ticket. His counsel was excellent and he really took the time to understand the situation and give expert guidance on how best to proceed. He got the ticket dismissed and I got points taken off my license as a result of his counsel."

    Michael Moore
Tell Us About Your Experience With Attorney Anthony Montagna, III

Areas We Serve

Norfolk, Newport News, Hampton, Suffolk, Chesapeake, Portsmouth, Williamsburg/James City County, Northampton County, Southampton County, Isle of Wight County, York County, New Kent County, Accomack County, Virginia Beach and all of Virginia.

DUI, Reckless Driving, and Traffic, Divorce, Custody, and Criminal Law

Powered by Array Law

© 2022 Anthony Montagna, III