In re Termination of Parental Rights to Thomas J.S.

262 Wis. 2d 217 (2003)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Termination of Parental Rights to Thomas J.S.

Wisconsin Supreme Court
262 Wis. 2d 217 (2003)

Facts

Tammie J.C. (plaintiff) and Robert T.R. (defendant) were married in Wyoming in 1987. Tammie’s daughter from a previous marriage lived with them, and Tammie and Robert had a son, Thomas, together in 1988. In 1991 the family moved to Arizona. In 1992 Tammie’s daughter accused Robert of sexual assault, and Tammie took her daughter and Thomas and returned to Wyoming. Robert was convicted of sexual assault in Arizona and sentenced to 10 years in prison in Arizona. Robert filed for divorce in Arizona, and the court awarded sole custody of Thomas to Tammie, denying Robert visitation rights. Tammie moved again, eventually settling in Wisconsin in 1996, where she remarried her daughter’s biological father. In 2000 Tammie filed a petition in Wisconsin state court to terminate Robert’s parental rights, and Tammie’s husband filed a petition to adopt Thomas. Robert received notice of the petition, and the court granted Robert’s motion to delay the trial until Robert was released from prison. Robert moved to dismiss the petition, arguing that because he had never even been to Wisconsin, Wisconsin lacked personal jurisdiction over him. The Wisconsin court granted the parties time to resolve jurisdiction in Arizona. The Arizona court declined to exercise jurisdiction, because Thomas was not present in Arizona. Following a trial in which Robert participated by telephone, the Wisconsin court terminated Robert’s parental rights, finding that the termination was in Thomas’s best interests. Robert appealed, arguing Wisconsin lacked personal jurisdiction. The court of appeals held that Wisconsin did not have personal jurisdiction and reversed the termination order. Tammie appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Bradley, 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 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 815,000 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 815,000 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