LD 986
pg. 72
Page 71 of 77 An Act To Enact the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act Amendments of 1996 an... Page 73 of 77
Download Bill Text
LR 467
Item 1

 
explicitly state in its order that it is assuming responsibility
for the controlling child-support order. Neither the parties nor
other tribunals should be required to speculate about the effect
of the action taken by the tribunal under this section.

 
Sec. 42. 19-A MRSA §3254, as enacted by PL 1995, c. 694, Pt. B, §2
and affected by Pt. E, §2, is amended to read:

 
§3254. Recognition of order modified in another state

 
A If a child support order issued by a tribunal of this
State shall recognize a modification of its earlier child
support order is modified by a tribunal of another state that
assumed jurisdiction pursuant to a law substantially similar
to this chapter and, upon request, except as otherwise
provided in this chapter, shall the Uniform Interstate Family
Support Act, a tribunal of the State:

 
1. Enforce amounts accruing before modification. Enforce
May enforce the order that was modified only as to amounts
arrears and interest accruing before the modification;

 
2. Enforce nonmodifiable aspects. Enforce only
nonmodifiable aspects of that order;

 
3. Relief for violations before modification. Provide
other May provide appropriate relief only for violations of
that its order that occurred before the effective date of the
modification; and

 
4. Recognize modifying order. Recognize Shall recognize
the modifying order of the other state, upon registration, for
the purpose of enforcement.

 
Uniform Comment

 
(This is Section 612 of the Uniform Act.)

 
A key aspect of UIFSA is the deference to the controlling
child-support order of a sister State demanded from a tribunal
of the forum State. This applies not just to the original
order, but also to a modified child-support order issued by a
second State under the standards established by Section 611,
613, and 615. For the Act to function properly, the original
issuing State must recognize and accept the modified order as
controlling, and must regard its prior order as prospectively
inoperative. Because the UIFSA system is based on an
interlocking series of
state laws, it is fundamental that a modifying tribunal of one
State lacks the authority to direct the original issuing State
to release its continuing, exclusive jurisdiction. That result
is accomplished


Page 71 of 77 Top of Page Page 73 of 77