Grahm v. Superior Court

132 Cal. App. 4th 1193, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 270 (2005)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
G
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Grahm v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal
132 Cal. App. 4th 1193, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 270 (2005)

DM

Facts

Robert Grahm (father) (plaintiff) and his wife (mother) (defendant) were parents to twin girls born in California in October 2001. In October 2003, pursuant to the couple’s divorce, a California court entered an order awarding physical custody to the mother, visitation rights to the father, and joint legal custody. One month before the custody/visitation order was issued, the mother and twins moved to New York, with the father’s consent. In early 2004, the mother sought to modify the custody arrangement in a New York court. The court dismissed her motion for lack of jurisdiction, and an appellate court affirmed. In the meanwhile, the father was filing motions regarding visitation and custody in a California court. Ultimately, he moved for sole legal and primary physical custody. In March 2005, a California family court (defendant) issued an order declining to exercise jurisdiction, applying Family Code § 3422, on the grounds that the mother and twins’ move to New York left them without a significant connection to California. The court also reasoned that evidence in the matter was in New York. The father petitioned the California Court of Appeal for a writ of mandate forcing the family court to vacate its order.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Hastings, J.)

Concurrence (Epstein, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 810,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Conflict of Laws
Family Law

Key Terms