Maryland Anne Arundel County Child Custody Dispute Writ Certiorari Jurisdiction Lawyers Attorneys

KATHIE M. GRUBER v. DAVID GRUBERSpecial Appeals.
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND- Whether, by suggesting that 'only in the most
June 20, 2002.extraordinary circumstances' should a parent that
Kathie M. Gruber, petitioner, and David Gruber,has purportedly engaged in 'reprehensible conduct'
respondent, were married in Tennessee onbe allowed to obtain relief from a Maryland court,
November 23, 1998. They had one child, Katarina,the Court of Special Appeals has improperly
who was born May 5, 1999. Ms. Gruber left thedeprived the Circuit Court of the discretion to
marital home with Katarina on March 18, 2000. exercise jurisdiction over a custody dispute as
On March 21, 2000, Ms. Gruber returned topermitted under § 9-208?
Maryland, where she had lived before moving toThis Court has often stated that, except as
Tennessee. On June 7, 2000, Ms. Gruber filed aconstitutionally authorized, appellate jurisdiction "is
complaint for custody and other appropriate reliefdetermined entirely by statute, and that,
in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County. Ontherefore, a right of appeal must be legislatively
October 11, she filed an amended complaintgranted.  Where appellate jurisdiction is lacking,
seeking both divorce and custody. In thethe appellate court will dismiss the appeal on its
amended complaint, Ms. Gruber contended thatown motion.  A trial court's decision to deny a
the Circuit Court should assume jurisdiction for thechallenge to its jurisdiction does not settle or
reasons stated in the first complaint and becauseconclude the rights of any party or deny the
Katarina had been living in Maryland for sixparty the means of proceeding further. 
months. On October 18, 2000, Mr. Gruber filed aTherefore, the Circuit Court's denial of Mr.
complaint for divorce and sole custody of KatarinaGruber's challenge to the court's jurisdiction did not
in the Circuit Court of Tennessee for the 30thdeprive Mr. Gruber of the care and custody of his
Judicial Division at Memphis. The same day, thechild or change the terms of such an order, and,
Clerk of the Tennessee court issued ex parteas such, the Circuit Court's decision does not
custody order until further hearing."  Despite theconstitute an appealable interlocutory order under
order issued by the Tennessee court, on§ 12-303(3)(x).  This Court held that a trial
November 2, 2000, Mr. and Ms. Gruber appearedcourt's order denying a challenge to its jurisdiction
in the Circuit for Anne Arundel County for anis a nonappealable interlocutory order. A trial
emergency hearing on custody of Katarina. Oncourt's denial of a challenge to its jurisdiction does
November 6, 2000, Mr. Gruber filed a motion tonot settle or conclude the rights of any party.
dismiss or, in the alternative, change of venue. OnTherefore, the Circuit Court's assumption of
November 8, Mr. Gruber filed a motion to revokejurisdiction did not deprive Mr. Gruber of the care
his consent and for immediate hearing regardingand custody of his child or change the terms of
jurisdiction.  Later, a Maryland trial court ruled itsuch an order. Accordingly, no appeal lies. The
had jurisdiction to determine the custody of theappeal was premature and it should have been
parties' minor child.   In appeal, the appellatedismissed by the Court of Special Appeals.
court held the trial court erred in assumingThe Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the
jurisdiction without first considering the father'sappellate court and remanded the case with
argument that the trial court should have declinedinstructions to dismiss the appeal.
to exercise jurisdiction because the motherDisclaimer:
engaged in reprehensible conduct.  PetitionerThese summaries are provided by the SRIS Law
mother filed a petition for writ of certiorariGroup.  They represent the firm's unofficial views
requesting review of the decision of the Court ofof the Justices' opinions.