UIFSA Jurisdiction in Colorado for Child Support & Alimony

In the American legal system, jurisdiction is a vital prerequisite for a state court to exercise jurisdiction over an issue or the parties. And when it comes to family support (child support or spousal maintenance), the court must have "UIFSA jurisdiction" to act, which is jurisdiction to enter orders pursuant to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act.

A court can have jurisdiction to enter some orders, but not others. So just because a court has jurisdiction over a child and enters child custody orders, it does not necessarily mean that it has jurisdiction to enter child support orders. Or a court may have jurisdiction to dissolve a marriage, but lacking personal jurisdiction over the other spouse, may not have UIFSA jurisdiction to enter alimony orders.

For family support orders, at a minimum, personal jurisdiction over the other parent is required, and more is required if a different state has previously entered a support order.

UIFSA - The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act

As a result of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, the federal government enacted the  Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, which mandated that all states must adopt the 1993 version of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA), or lose federal child support enforcement funding. 42 U.S. Code § 666(f). Unsurprisingly, all states have complied by adopting the act. And in 2014, Congress repeated the mandate, requiring states to adopt the 2008 version of UIFSA.

Colorado’s UIFSA adoption is codified at C.R.S. 14-5-101, et seq. The act provides the basis for Colorado to exercise initial child support or spousal maintenance jurisdiction, or to modify prior support orders issued by Colorado or other states.

Contrast Between UIFSA Jurisdiction & UCCJEA Parenting Jurisdiction

There is an interesting contrast between child custody jurisdiction under the UCCJEA and UIFSA jurisdiction for family support purposes. Jurisdiction to enter a child custody order is based solely upon the child’s home state, not whether the court has personal jurisdiction over the respondent.

• UCCJEA Jurisdiction = Child’s Home State. If a child has lived in Colorado for at least 182 days, Colorado is the child’s home state, and the UCCJEA allows Colorado to enter an initial parenting order no matter where the other parent lives.
• UIFSA Jurisdiction = Personal Jurisdiction Over Respondent. But unless the court also has a basis for personal jurisdiction over the respondent under UIFSA, the court must stop at custody, and cannot enter a support order.

It is critical for your family law attorney to understand the differences in custody jurisdiction vs UIFSA jurisdiction when parents live in different states.

Personal Jurisdiction Under Colorado “Long Arm” Statute

Before UIFSA, we only had the Colorado “Long Arm” statute, a law which allows, in limited circumstances, courts of this state to reach out and assert jurisdiction over non-residents. Among the several grounds for jurisdiction are two which pertain to family law:

• Matrimonial Domicile. Colorado may enter support or maintenance orders against a party who moved away from Colorado, if that party previously maintained a matrimonial domicile here, and the other party continues to reside here without interruption. C.R.S. 13-1-124(1)(e).
• Intercourse. Engaging in sexual intercourse in Colorado for the purposes of establishing paternity or support for the child. C.R.S. 13-1-124(1)(f). Note that this is partially redundant with UIFSA, as intercourse is already specified as a basis for jurisdiction over a child. C.R.S. 14-5-201(a)(6).

Physical Presence vs UIFSA Jurisdiction

Two interesting parts of the UIFSA show the difference between physical presence and UIFSA jurisdiction:

• Limited Immunity. Service of process upon an out-of-state resident who is present in Colorado for a support hearing does not confer personal jurisdiction for any other purpose. C.R.S. 14-5-314 (Note that this is limited - if a person crashes his car on the way to the courthouse, he can still be sued for the crash).
• Physical Presence not necessary to establish jurisdiction over a non-resident, nor is it sufficient to do so. C.R.S. 14-5-316(a). This same statute also requires courts to permit out-of-state witnesses to participate by telephone or electronic means. C.R.S. 14-5-316(f).

Initial UIFSA Jurisdiction Over Child Support or Spousal Maintenance

Before a Colorado court can exercise jurisdiction over a non-resident, the court must have a basis of personal jurisdiction over the respondent. Simply serving someone out of state, without more, is not sufficient to confer personal jurisdiction unless the respondent is already “subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of Colorado.”  C.R.S. 13-1-125(1).

Personal jurisdiction to establish or enforce a support order against a non-resident requires satisfying one of bases of UIFSA jurisdiction set forth in C.R.S. 14-5-201(a):

1. Personal service inside Colorado.
2. Submission to Colorado jurisdiction by consent, entering a general appearance, or waiver.
3. The respondent resided with the child in Colorado.
4. The respondent resided in Colorado and provided prenatal expenses or support to the child.
5. The child resides in Colorado as a result of the respondent’s acts or directives. Note that simply consenting to the child living in Colorado with the other parent does not constitute an act or directive. Zinke.
6. The respondent engaged in sexual intercourse in Colorado which may have resulted in the child’s conception.
7. There is any other basis for jurisdiction consistent with state and federal Constitutions.

Home State or “First to File” When Multiple States Have UIFSA Jurisdiction

There may well be multiple states which have initial family support jurisdiction under UIFSA section 201 factors. In that situation, per C.R.S. 14-5-204(a), once a petition to establish a support order has been filed elsewhere, Colorado may only enter a support order if:

1. The petition in Colorado is filed before the deadline to respond in the other state,
2. The contesting party timely challenges the other state’s exercise of jurisdiction, and
3. If relevant, Colorado is the child’s home state.

If neither state is the child’s home state, then subsection (3) will not come into play, and the “first to file” will control. Thus, the only time it matters where a petition was first filed under UIFSA is if (1) multiple states have jurisdiction, and (2) neither of those states is the child’s home state.

Once a state has entered an order, the continuing exclusive jurisdiction provisions of UIFSA prevent multiple states from asserting jurisdiction.

UIFSA Child Support Jurisdiction to Modify Colorado Order

Once a Colorado court has entered an initial child support order which is the controlling order, pursuant to C.R.S. 14-5-205(a) the court retains "continuing & exclusive" UIFSA jurisdiction to modify the order if:

1. A the time of modification, Colorado is the residence of either the obligee, the obligor, or the child for whom support is owing, or
2. The parties consent to Colorado exercising continuing jurisdiction.

No Loss of Personal Jurisdiction Over Party Who Moves

Once Colorado has acquired UIFSA jurisdiction over both parties, as long as Colorado has exclusive continuing jurisdiction to modify the order, it also retains that personal jurisdiction even over a party who moves. C.R.S. 14-5-202 There is no need to reestablish a basis of jurisdiction over an out-of-state party.

Controlling Child Support Order

Notice that in order for Colorado to have UIFSA jurisdiction to modify its prior order, it must be the controlling order. In determining which order is controlling, the following rules apply:

• If Colorado has issued the only order, it is the controlling order. C.R.S. 14-5-207(a).
• If there are two or more support orders, but only one state would have exclusive continuing jurisdiction, that state’s order controls. C.R.S. 14-5-207(b)(1).
• If there are two or more support orders and multiple states would have exclusive continuing jurisdiction, the order issued by child’s home state, if any, is the controlling order. If none of the orders are from the child’s home state, then the most recent order controls.C.R.S. 14-5-207(b)(2).
• If there are two or more orders for the same obligor and child, a Colorado court which has jurisdiction over both parties determines which of those orders is controlling. C.R.S. 14-5-207(c).

Loss of UIFSA Child Support Jurisdiction to Modify Support

However, even though Colorado may have entered the prior support order, a Colorado court cannot modify its own order if:

1. No party or the child live in Colorado (which means Colorado has lost its continuing, exclusive jurisdiction), C.R.S. 14-5-205(a),
2. The parties file a consent in Colorado for another state with jurisdiction over at least one party to exercise jurisdiction over support, C.R.S. 14-5-205(b)(1),
3. It is not the controlling order,  or
4. Another state with jurisdiction has already modified the Colorado order under UIFSA. C.R.S. 14-5-205(c).

Let’s assume that Colorado has entered an order for father to pay mother child support, then both parents move out of Colorado; the father moves to California, and the mother and child move to Texas. Since none of the parties live here, a Colorado court has lost UIFSA jurisdiction to modify its prior child support order.

Everyone Leaves, One Party Returns to Colorado

If everyone leaves Colorado, but one party then returns, and the child support order has not been modified in the interim, then Colorado still has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction as explained by the Comment to Section 205:

“If the order is not modified during this time of mutual absence, a return to reside in the issuing state by a party or child immediately identifies the proper forum at the time of filing a proceeding for modification.”

This can be a bit complicated, but it means another state cannot have "flyover jurisdiction". In other words, once everyone moved out of Colorado, this state would have lost jurisdiction, but only if one of the parties filed a motion to modify child support during that time. But if nothing was filed, then Colorado never actually lost jurisdiction, so upon one party returning to Colorado, UIFSA child support jurisdiction resumes as if it was never lost.

One Party Lives Outside United States

If Colorado issued the last child support order, and one party now lives outside the United States, Colorado has UIFSA jurisdiction to modify its prior order even if the other party no longer lives in the state, or in the U.S. C.R.S. 14-5-611(f).

UIFSA Child Support Jurisdiction to Modify Another State’s Order

As long as a party or child is in Colorado, courts of this state can modify its own support orders. But what does it take for Colorado to modify a child support order from another state?

Per C.R.S. 14-5-611(a)(1), Colorado has UIFSA jurisdiction to modify another state’s child support order if:

1. Neither the child, obligee or obligor live in the issuing state.
2. The non-resident party is the petitioner seeking modification, and
3. Colorado has personal jurisdiction over the respondent.

This is informally known as “play away” jurisdiction - in other words, if the parties live in different states from the state which entered the original order, whichever party wants to modify the child support order has to file the petition in the other party’s state.

Example: assume Iowa issued a child support order, and now the mother lives in Colorado and the father lives in Texas with the child. If the mother wants to modify support, she would have to file a petition in Texas where the father lives, and if the father sought a child support modification, he would have to file in Colorado where the mother lives.

Or, if everyone consents to Colorado jurisdiction, then this state can modify child support as long as someone lives here. C.R.S. 14-5-611(2).

Colorado Law Applies When Modifying Out-of-State Order

Once Colorado has determined that it has UIFSA jurisdiction to modify an out-of-state order, Colorado law, including the Colorado Child Support Guidelines, applies to the modification, not the law of the original state. C.R.S. 14-5-303.

Jurisdiction to Modify Alimony

Compared to child support, jurisdiction to modify spousal support (“maintenance” in Colorado) is relatively simple, because it's more restrictive.

If Colorado enters a spousal maintenance order, it retains exclusive continuing jurisdiction to modify it as long as the order remains in effect. C.R.S. 14-5-211(a). This is true even if everyone moves out of state.

Similarly, Colorado may not modify a spousal maintenance support order from another state’s court which has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction under its law to modify the order. C.R.S. 14-5-211(b).

Jurisdiction to Enforce Support Order

Unlike the UIFSA jurisdiction required to modify a support order, which is exclusive, multiple states may have jurisdiction to enforce a support order. Colorado can enforce its own controlling order, or request that another state with jurisdiction enforce the order.

Colorado has UIFSA jurisdiction to enforce any other state's child support or spousal support order as long as it has a basis for jurisdiction over the respondent under C.R.S. 14-5-201(a) (i.e. the same grounds required to establish initial jurisdiction to enter a support order which are referenced above, including service of process in Colorado, residence, intercourse in the state, etc).

Foreign Country Support Orders

UIFSA also has a Part 7, which governs enforcement of foreign support orders which are truly foreign, issued by one of the 43 signatory states to the 2007 Family Maintenance Convention. Registration of the foreign order is done in a similar way as an out-of-state order, with some additional protections for the respondent to make sure jurisdiction and due process requirements were followed. And once registration is confirmed, the international child support or alimony order can be enforced in Colorado the same as an order originally issued in this state.

See our article on Foreign Support Orders for more details on UIFSA jurisdiction over international support orders.

FAQ - UIFSA Jurisdiction over Child Support & Alimony