Pulkkinen v. Pulkkinen

A Michigan state court directed a father, Jyrki Tuono Juhani Pulkkinen (the father) (defendant) to pay the mother, Karen Elaine Pulkkinen (the mother) (plaintiff) child support. The mother moved to Florida and filed a petition in Florida state court to modify the support order. The father, who had moved to California, filed a motion to dismiss based on Florida’s Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (state act), which gave Florida courts jurisdiction to grant a petition to modify a foreign support order only if the petitioner was not a Florida resident. The mother responded that the federal Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act (federal act) required Florida courts to assert jurisdiction over the petition. The federal act required states to give full faith and credit to other states’ support orders, subject to an exception if all parties no longer resided in the original ordering state. If falling within the exception, the original state’s (in this case, Michigan’s) exclusive jurisdiction over a support order would be removed. However, the federal act also provided that modification of the original state’s order could only happen in a state that had jurisdiction over the nonmovant for purposes of the modification. Essentially, the mother asserted that even though she was a Florida resident and thus would not ordinarily qualify for jurisdiction under the state act, the federal act required the Florida court to assume jurisdiction because Michigan courts lost jurisdiction when both parties moved. The Florida circuit court found in favor of the mother, ruling that the federal act preempted the state act and required Florida courts to assume jurisdiction over the modification petition. The father appealed.