ÿWPCu …# V 0Ga %¨UN®4ü UD UPc ³ 0‹³ 0D> w‚ 0J’ 0TÜ 0^0 0hŽ 0rö 0|h 0†ä 0j 1uú U,o 0d›U,ÿ B+U>HB)†DC¯ AMòU*? D3i,œwÈ 0@?v~vÓý AOÐÆ 0Då D/) BX˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0†(n5$¡¡Ô€XMXX XÔ X(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularnnG z@<v@²3|x< 8ëu $ZŠ,Century-WP Regular.æF)Z8NewCenturySchlbk Regular(;(3’5$¤¤Ý ƒn5!ÝÔ€X XX XÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 Ó€< 2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco d< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1dd€-'Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial$$$$'ÿÿdxd "Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÔ€)ÔÔ€)ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€)XÔÌÌMarch€6,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó mÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ÔAlthough€€the€childððs€father€was€named€a€respondent,€the€only€trulyÏà0 àactive€respondents€in€this€case€are€the€paternal€grandparents€of€theÏchild.Ì("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€##X„d&ÓÑ#€##Xd#ÑÔ€ ÔÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ î ÒÔ€ÔÑ7€ XXdðdÈ7ÑÑ\R AØ'\Ñà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌ____________________________________________________________________________ÌÌIN€RE:à àà àà àà àà àà àÔ€ÔMaury€Circuit€No.€No.€6001Ô€ÔÌKYLE€EDWARD€DANGLERà àà àà àÔ€ÔC.A.€No.€01„A„01„9504„CV„00169Ô€ÔÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÔ€ÔHon.€Jim€T.€Hamilton,€JudgeÔ€ÔÌLISA€ANN€DANGLERà àà àà àà àÌÙ€€ÙßL€(+';+'h|üÕ` ç `€€LßÌà àPetitioner/Appellant,à àà àà àÌÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌEDWARD€EUGENE€DANGLER,Ìfather,€PATRICIA€G.€DANGLER,Ìand€EDWARD€C.€DANGLER,Ìgrandparents,ÌÌà àRespondents/AppelleesÌÌÌWALTER€L.€OLSON,€NashvilleÌAttorney€for€Petitioner/AppellantÌÌTHOMAS€W.€HARDIN,€Hardin€&€Parkes,€NashvilleÌAttorney€for€Respondents/AppelleesÌÌò òòòREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDóóó óÌÌÓÓOpinion€Filed:òòÌò òóó_________________________________________________________________________ó óÔ€ÔÌò òTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.ÌÓ  Óó óà àThis€case€involves€the€application€and€interpretation€of€certainÏprovisions€of€the€Uniform€Child€Custody€Jurisdiction€Act€(UCCJA)€asÏenacted€by€the€states€of€Missouri€and€Tennessee,€T.C.A.€ðððð€36„6„201€toÏ36„6„225€(1991),€as€well€as€the€Federal€Parental€Kidnapping€PreventionÏAct€(PKPA).€€28€U.S.C.A.€ðð€1738A€(1994).€The€courts€of€this€state€firstÏbecame€involved€with€this€tragic€set€of€complicated€circumstances€whenÏLisa€Ann€Dangler€(ð ðpetitionerðð),€a€resident€of€Missouri,€filed€suit€in€theÏCircuit€Court€of€Maury€County,€Tennessee€(ð ðTennessee€trial€courtðð)Ïseeking€to€have€that€court€enroll€a€foreign€judgment€from€the€state€ofÏMissouri€and€to€enforce€a€writ€of€habeas€corpus€issued€by€the€CircuitÏCourt€of€Barry€County,€Missouri€(ð ðMissouri€trial€courtðð),€which€had€asÏpart€of€a€divorce€proceeding€in€that€court€in€1983€awarded€petitionerÏcustody€of€€the€partiesðð€minor€child.€€Named€as€respondents€are€EugeneÏEdward€Dangler€(ð ðfatherðð)€and€the€childððs€paternal€grandparents,€PatriciaÏG.€Dangler€and€Edward€C.€Dangler€(by€name€or€ð ðrespondentsðð).× ƒ, ××  ×€€The€courtÏbelow€held€that€it€had€jurisdiction€of€this€case€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€36„6„201€and€proceeded€to€award€custody€to€the€paternal€grandparents,Ïgiving€petitioner€visitation€rights.€€On€appeal,€petitioner€has€presentedÍthree€issues€for€our€consideration€(1)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏengaging€in€a€ð ðbest€interest€of€the€child€evaluationðð€in€reaching€aÏdecision€as€to€custody,€absent€a€showing€of€substantial€harm€to€theÏchild;€(2)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€holding€that€the€order€ofÏhabeas€corpus€from€the€Missouri€court€was€unenforceable€in€this€state;Ïand€(3)€whether€petitioner€€is€entitled€to€attorneyððs€fees€in€connectionÏwith€this€litigation.ÌÌà àIn€their€brief€before€this€court,€respondents€raised€an€additionalÏissue€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€recognize€the€MichiganÏtrial€court€custody€order.€€This€is€a€non„issue€for€the€reason€thatÏrespondents€never€sought€to€have€the€Tennessee€trial€court€ratify€andÏaffirm€the€order€entered€by€the€Michigan€court.€€Furthermore,€theÏMichigan€trial€court€turned€over€to€the€Tennessee€trial€court€the€entireÏrecord€in€this€cause€in€Michigan,€thereby€deferring€whatever€jurisdictionÏit€had€to€the€courts€of€Tennessee.€€T.C.A.€ðð€36„6„203(a)(3).€€For€theÏreasons€hereinafter€stated,€we€reverse€and€remand€this€case€to€theÏTennessee€trial€court€for€further€proceedings.ÌÌà àIn€March€1981,€the€childððs€mother€and€father€were€married.€€TheirÍchild,€Kyle,€who€is€the€subject€of€this€litigation€was€born€in€Michigan€onÏMay€29,€1982.€€In€August€1982,€the€parties€moved€from€Michigan€to€BarryÏCounty,€Missouri.€€Following€the€parties€separation€in€May€1983,€KyleÏresided€with€petitioner,€although€his€father€continued€to€live€in€Missouri.€€ÌÌà àOn€or€about€June€15,€1983,€petitioner€filed€a€petition€forÏdissolution€of€the€marriage€in€the€Circuit€Court€of€Barry€County,ÏMissouri.€€She€also€sought€custody€of€Kyle.€€Father€was€served€withÏprocess€and€filed€an€answer,€but€failed€to€appear€when€the€matter€wasÏset€for€a€hearing.€€A€default€hearing€was€had€in€the€Missouri€trial€court,Ïresulting€in€a€decree€of€dissolution€of€marriage€entered€on€December€30,Ï1983€that€awarded€custody€of€Kyle€to€petitioner.€€ÌÌà à€Respondents€filed€a€petition€for€custody€of€Kyle€in€the€CircuitÏCourt€of€Washtenaw€County,€Michigan€on€January€26,€1984€and€wereÏawarded€temporary€custody€on€the€following€day.€€That€order€providedÏthat€the€custody€provisions€of€the€order€entered€in€Missouri€would€beÏstayed€pending€further€orders€of€the€Michigan€court.€€It€also€providedÏthat€the€petitioner€as€mother€of€Kyle,€along€with€respondents,€shouldÏsubmit€to€psychological€and€psychiatric€evaluations€and€interviews€withÍthe€Washtenaw€County€Friend€of€the€Court€to€assist€the€court€in€making€aÏdetermination€as€to€permanent€custody.ÌÌà àSubsequently,€on€May€14,€1986,€the€Circuit€Court€of€WashtenawÏCounty€Michigan€entered€an€order€stating€that€a€hearing€had€been€heldÏand,€based€upon€recommendations€to€it€from€the€Washtenaw€CountyÏFriend€of€the€Court,€awarded€permanent€custody€of€Kyle€to€respondents.€ÏVisitation€rights€were€awarded€to€petitioner€and€father,€but€limited€toÏthe€residence€of€the€respondents.€€Both€natural€parents€were€ordered€toÏpay€weekly€child€support,€with€petitionerððs€obligation€being€$36.00€perÏweek.ÌÌà àIn€1991,€the€respondents€obtained€court€approval€in€Michigan€toÏchange€their€domicile,€as€well€as€Kyleððs,€to€Tennessee.€€€On€or€aboutÏAugust€3,€1993,€petitioner€filed€for€and€obtained€a€writ€of€habeas€corpusÏin€the€Circuit€Court€of€Barry€County,€Missouri€to€enforce€the€custodyÏprovisions€of€the€1983€divorce€decree.€€The€writ€was€served€onÏrespondents€in€Tennessee€on€or€about€February€18,€1994.€€An€order€ofÏhabeas€corpus€was€entered€on€March€23,€1994.€€Shortly€thereafter,Ïpetitioner€filed€a€petition€in€the€Circuit€Court€of€Maury€County€for€theÍenrollment€of€a€foreign€judgment€and€for€enforcement€of€the€order€ofÏhabeas€corpus.€€A€full€hearing€was€held€on€May€27,€1994,€after€which€theÏtrial€court€took€the€matter€under€advisement.€€Prior€to€this€time,€theÏrecord€of€the€Michigan€proceedings,€wherein€the€respondent€had€beenÏgiven€custody€of€Kyle,€were€transmitted€to€the€clerk€of€the€trial€courtÏbelow,€reflecting€the€deferral€of€the€Michigan€court€to€the€TennesseeÏcourt€in€this€matter€pursuant€the€Tennessee€UCCJA.€€T.C.A.€ðð€36„6„203(a)(3).ÌÌà àOn€June€30,€1994,€the€trial€court€entered€its€order€finding€theÏMichigan€order€to€be€ð ðnull€and€void€and€unenforceable,ðð€as€well€as€findingÏthe€Missouri€order€to€be€unenforceable.€€The€court€further€declared€thatÏit€had€jurisdiction€of€the€child€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€36„6„201€andÏawarded€custody€of€Kyle€to€the€respondents€based€upon€the€childððs€bestÏinterests.Ì€ÌÓ  ÓThe€UCCJA€and€PKPAÌÓ  Óà àWe€first€must€ascertain€the€application€and€interpretation€ofÏcertain€provisions€of€the€UCCJA€as€enacted€by€the€states€of€Missouri€andÏTennessee,€as€well€as€the€federal€PKPA.€€Under€the€PKPA,€child€custodyÍdeterminations,€to€the€extent€that€they€are€made€consistent€with€theÏprovisions€of€the€Act,€are€entitled€to€full€faith€and€credit€in€every€state.€Ï28€U.S.C.A.€ðð€1738A(a).€€The€PKPA€was€designed€to€avoid€the€conflictingÏchild€custody€decrees€that€have€been€entered€in€this€case.€€€ÌÌà àWith€regard€to€the€modification€of€existing€child€custody€decrees,Ïthe€PKPA€states:ÌÓÓà8 àÌà à(c)€A€child€custody€determination€made€by€a€court€of€a€State€isÏconsistent€à àwith€the€provisions€of€this€section€only€ifð"ðÌà8 à(1)€such€court€has€jurisdiction€under€the€law€of€such€state;ÌÌÔ€Ôà8 à(d)€The€jurisdiction€of€a€court€of€a€State€which€has€made€aÏchild€custody€determination€consistently€with€the€provisionsÏof€this€section€continues€as€long€as€the€requirement€ofÏsubsection€(c)(1)€of€this€section€continues€to€be€met€and€suchÏState€remains€the€residence€of€the€child€or€of€any€contestant.ÌÌÔ€Ôà8 à(f)€A€court€of€a€state€may€modify€a€determination€of€theÏcustody€of€the€same€child€made€by€a€court€of€another€State,Ïifð"ðÌà8 à(1)€it€has€jurisdiction€to€make€such€a€child€custodyÏdetermination;€andÌà8 àÌà à(2)€the€court€of€the€other€State€no€longer€has€jurisdiction,€or€it€hasÏdeclined€à àto€exercise€such€jurisdiction€to€modify€such€determination.ÌÌÓÓÌ28€U.S.C.A.€ðð€1738A(c)(1),€(d),€(f).€€Ô€ÔUnder€Tennesseeððs€version€of€theÏUCCJA,€€ð ðjurisdiction€shall€not€be€exercised€to€modify€an€existingÍcustody€decree€except€in€accordance€with€ðð€36„6„215.ðð€€T.C.A.€Ô€ÔððÔ€Ô€36„6„203(b).€€Section€36„6„215€provides€that€ÌÓÓÌà8 à(a)€If€a€court€of€another€state€has€made€a€custody€decreeÏrecognizable€and€enforceable€under€ðð€36„6„213,€a€court€ofÏthis€state€òòshall€notóó€modify€that€decree€unless:ÌÌà8 à(1)€It€appears€to€the€court€of€this€state€that€the€court€whichÏrendered€the€decree€does€not€now€have€jurisdiction€underÏjurisdictional€prerequisites€substantially€in€accordance€withÏthis€part€or€has€declined€to€assume€jurisdiction€to€modify€theÏdecree;€andÌÌà8 à(2)€The€court€of€this€state€has€jurisdiction.ÌÌÓÓÌT.C.A.€ðð€36„6„215€(emphasis€added).Ô€Ô€€ÌÌà àAs€can€be€seen€from€the€above,€the€PKPA€follows€the€prioritizedÏplan€also€utilized€by€the€Tennessee€version€of€the€Uniform€Act.€€UnderÏboth€the€PKPA€and€the€UCCJA€as€adopted€in€this€state,€in€order€to€modifyÏan€existing€custody€decree,€the€trial€court€must€have€jurisdiction€underÏthe€laws€of€this€state,€and€the€original€rendering€state€either€no€longerÏhas€jurisdiction,€or€has€deferred€to€Tennessee€as€the€more€appropriateÏforum.ÌÌà àBoth€the€PKPA€and€Tennessee€UCCJA€defines€ð ðhome€stateðð€as€theÏð ðstate€in€which€the€child€immediately€preceding€the€time€involved€livedÏwith€.€.€.€a€parent€or€person€€acting€as€a€parent€€.€.€.€€for€at€least€six€(6)Ïconsecutive€months.ðð€€28€U.S.C.A.€ðð€1738A;€T.C.A.€ðð€36„6„202(5).€€TheÏrecord€in€this€case€without€contradiction€reflects€that€Kyle€has€residedÏin€Tennessee€with€his€paternal€grandparents€since€1991,€three€yearsÏprior€to€petitioner€filing€her€petition€to€enforce€a€Missouri€judgment€inÏTennessee.€€We,€therefore,€conclude€that€at€the€time€this€petition€wasÏfiled,€Tennessee€qualified€as€Kyleððs€ð ðhome€state.ððÌÌà àHowever,€just€because€Tennessee€has€become€the€home€state€of€theÏchild,€that€fact€alone€does€not€automatically€give€the€courts€of€thisÏstate€the€authority€to€preempt€the€jurisdiction€of€the€original€homeÏstate.€€òòSee€State€ex€rel.€Cooper€v.€Hamiltonóó,€688€S.W.2d€821,€824€(Tenn.Ï1985).€€€Our€supreme€court€in€òòCooperóó€stressed€the€distinction€between€aÏcourt€possessing€jurisdiction€and€the€actual€exercise€of€jurisdiction.€ÏAmong€the€stated€purposes€of€the€UCCJA€are€to€ð ðavoid€jurisdictionalÏcompetition€and€conflict€with€courts€of€other€statesðð€and€ð ðdeterÏabductions€and€other€unilateral€removals€of€children€undertaken€toÏobtain€custody€awards.ðð€€T.C.A.€Ô€ÔððÔ€Ô€36„6„201.€€These€purposes€would€not€beÍserved€if€states€modified€existing€child€custody€orders€based€solely€uponÏthe€fact€that€the€child€had€resided€in€the€state€for€six€months.€€The€PKPAÏgives€priority€to€the€state€that€€rendered€the€original€child€custody€orderÏso€long€as€one€of€the€original€contestants€remains€in€that€state,€and€thatÏstate€otherwise€retains€jurisdiction.€€28€U.S.C.A.€ðð€1738A(d);€òòCooperóó,Ï688€S.W.2d€at€825.€€ÌÌà àThe€PKPA€and€Tennessee€UCCJA€also€mandate€that€courts€decline€toÏexercise€jurisdiction€when€there€is€a€pending€proceeding€in€another€stateÏexercising€jurisdiction€substantially€in€conformity€with€the€UCCJA.€€28ÏU.S.C.A.€€Ô€ÔððÔ€Ô€1738A(g);€T.C.A.€Ô€ÔððÔ€Ô€36„6„207(a).€€If€a€Tennessee€court€hasÏreason€to€believe€that€a€custody€proceeding€is€pending€in€anotherÏjurisdiction,€the€court€must€make€a€full€inquiry€to€the€state€courtÏadministrator€or€other€appropriate€official.€€T.C.A.€Ô€ÔððÔ€Ô€36„6„207(b).€€Ìà8 àÌà àIt€has€long€been€established€in€this€state€that€in€child€custodyÏcases,Ìthe€welfare€of€the€child€is€paramount.€€As€the€middle€section€of€thisÏcourt€said€in€òòBah€v.€Bahóó,€668€S.W.2d€663,€665€(Tenn.€App.€1983),€theÏwelfare€of€the€child€is€the€ð ðalpha€and€the€omega.ðð€€Furthermore,€as€theÍhome€state€of€the€minor€child€involved€in€this€jurisdictional€tug€of€war,Ïthe€courts€of€this€state€have€an€additional€responsibility€to€see€that€notÏonly€justice€is€done,€but€that€the€welfare€of€the€child€is€protected.€ÏInasmuch€as€the€courts€of€this€state€have€jurisdiction€over€Kyle,€thisÏcourt€is€of€the€opinion€that€based€upon€its€inherent€powers€along€withÏthe€PKPA€and€UCCJA,€we€should€fashion€a€remedy€that€would€accomplishÏboth€these€purposes.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€in€this€case€heard€a€substantial€amount€of€proofÏconcerning€the€qualifications€of€petitioner€as€a€custodial€parentð"ðmoreÏparticularly€as€to€the€lack€of€qualifications€for€the€roleð"ðalong€withÏtestimony€as€to€the€environment€that€the€child€has€been€living€in€forÏseveral€years.€€€There€was€testimony€to€the€effect€that€in€the€weeks€andÏmonths€shortly€after€his€birth,€which€took€place€in€Michigan,€neitherÏpetitioner€nor€Kyleððs€father€had€anything€to€do€with€his€care.€€Rather,ÏKyle€was€substantially€cared€for€by€his€paternal„grandparents€and€greatÏgrandparents.€€There€was€also€proof€to€the€effect€that€after€the€divorceÏwas€obtained€in€Missouri€in€1983,€at€a€time€when€Kyle€was€just€over€oneÏyear€old€and€€residing€with€his€paternal€grandparents€in€MichiganÏ(although€under€somewhat€questionable€circumstances),€petitioner€wentÍto€Michigan€and€through€her€attorney€sought€to€set€aside€the€MichiganÏtrial€courtððs€order€giving€temporary€custody€of€Kyle€to€respondents.€€ItÏfurther€appears€from€the€record€below€that€petitioner€took€part€inÏpsychological€evaluations€through€a€Michigan€agency€in€connection€withÏthe€courtððs€consideration€of€its€award€of€permanent€custody€of€Kyle€toÏrespondents.€€After€the€motion€to€set€aside€the€temporary€custody€orderÏwas€overruled,€petitioner€took€no€further€steps€to€seek€to€have€the€trialÏcourtððs€order€reviewed€on€appeal.€€ÌÌà àThe€Michigan€courtððs€award€of€temporary€custody€to€respondents,Ïas€well€as€the€later€order€of€permanent€custody,€gave€petitionerÏvisitation€privileges€with€Kyle,€which€she€never€sought€to€exercise€atÏany€time€up€to€the€date€of€trial€in€this€case€below.€€ÌÌà àRespondent€Patricia€Dangler,€testified€that€for€all€but€six€monthsÏof€Kyleððs€life€she€had€raised€him,€either€in€Michigan€or€in€Tennessee,Ïwhich€became€their€€new€domicile€in€1991.ÌÌà àPatricia€Dangler€further€testified€that€at€one€point€petitioner€toldÏher€that€she€did€not€want€the€child.€€Respondent€further€testified€thatÍduring€the€entire€period€of€timeð"ðalmost€twelve€yearsð"ðpetitioner€neverÏsent€Kyle€a€birthday€card,€Christmas€card,€or€card€of€any€type,€nor€didÏshe€ever€send€him€a€present€or€write€him€a€letter.€€Under€cross„examination€at€the€hearing€in€Maury€County€petitioner€admitted€that€thisÏwas€correct.€€There€was€also€uncontradicted€proof€that€petitioner€neverÏsought€to€exercise€her€visitation€rights€in€either€the€Michigan€orÏTennessee€location.ÌÌà àMrs.€Thornberry,€Kyleððs€great„grandmother,€testified€that€whenÏKyle€was€about€eight€years€old€and€still€residing€in€Michigan,€he€statedÏthat€he€would€like€to€see€his€mother.€€Mrs.€Thornberry€proceeded€to€tellÏthis€to€petitioner,€who€said€she€feared€coming€to€Michigan€to€see€himÏbecause€she€might€get€hit€for€child€support.€€Petitioner€also€testifiedÏunder€cross„examination€that€she€did€not€ð ðknowðð€Kyle,€who€was€twelveÏyears€old€at€the€time€of€the€trial.ÌÌà àUnder€all€these€circumstances,€this€is€compelling€proof€for€a€trialÏjudge€when€faced€with€a€decision€concerning€the€best€interest€of€aÏtwelve€year€old€boy€in€a€child€custody€dispute.€€Under€the€UCCJA,Ïjurisdiction€may€exist€in€more€than€one€jurisdiction€at€a€time.€€It€wouldÍappear€that€at€the€time€the€court€below€conducted€this€hearing€pursuantÏto€the€filing€of€the€petition€for€the€enforcing€of€a€foreign€custodyÏjudgment€that€the€courts€of€Tennessee€and€Missouri€had€simultaneousÏjurisdiction.ÌÌà àÌà àThere€is€nothing€in€this€record€to€indicate€that€the€Missouri€trialÏcourt€had€any€knowledge€whatsoever€of€the€history€of€Kyleððs€upbringingÏfrom€the€day€the€divorce€decree€was€entered€until€petitioner€filed€herÏpetition€for€a€writ€of€habeas€corpus€in€Missouri.€€Under€theÏcircumstances,€we€conclude€that€we€should€remand€this€case€to€the€trialÏcourt.€€We€are€further€of€the€opinion€that€the€Tennessee€trial€courtÏshould,€pursuant€to€the€provisions€of€ðð€36„6„207(c)€of€the€Uniform€Act,Ïcommunicate€with€the€trial€court€in€Missouri€to€the€end€that€the€issue€ofÏKyleððs€custody€might€be€litigated€in€the€more€appropriate€forum.€€€WeÏstrongly€suggest€that€the€Tennessee€trial€court€cause€to€be€properlyÏtransmitted€to€the€Missouri€trial€court€a€certified€copy€of€the€transcriptÏof€the€hearing€below,€and€after€the€Missouri€court€has€had€theÏopportunity€to€consider€said€transcript€to€ascertain€whether€theÏMissouri€trial€court€desired€to€defer€jurisdiction€of€this€matter€to€theÍTennessee€trial€court,€in€light€of€the€fact€that€Tennessee€is€now€theÏhome€state€of€Kyle.ÌÌà àOnce€that€has€been€done,€and€in€the€event€the€Missouri€trial€courtÏshould€in€its€infinite€wisdom€defer€jurisdiction€to€Tennessee€as€theÏmore€appropriate€forum,€the€trial€court€should€order€another€hearing.€€AtÏthat€time,€in€light€of€our€supreme€courtððs€recent€opinion€in€òòBond€v.ÏMcKenzieóó,€896€S.W.2d€546€(Tenn.€1995),€as€this€is€a€custody€disputeÏbetween€a€parent€and€a€non„parent,€the€trial€court€should€give€notice€asÏrequired€by€due€process€and€allow€proof€to€be€offered€€as€to€whetherÏthere€would€be€substantial€harm€to€the€child€if€custody€were€awarded€toÏpetitioner.€€If€there€is€a€finding€of€substantial€harm€to€the€child,€theÏcourt€may€then€permit€such€proof€to€be€presented€so€as€to€enable€it€toÏengage€in€a€general€ð ðbest€interest€of€the€childðð€evaluation€in€making€aÏdetermination€of€custody.ÌÌà àThis€court€also€notes€that€the€trial€court€omitted€making€aÏdisposition€of€petitionerððs€request€for€attorney€fees€and€costs€inÏbringing€this€proceeding,€€It€is€therefore€respectfully€requested€toÏdispose€of€this€issue€in€the€upcoming€hearing.€€ÌÌà àAccordingly,€under€these€circumstances,€while€we€reverse€theÏorder€of€the€trial€court€awarding€custody€to€respondents,€it€is€the€orderÏof€this€court€that€the€child€shall€remain€in€the€custody€of€the€paternalÏgrandparents€pending€further€orders€of€the€trial€court,€following€furtherÏproceedings€taken€by€it€in€conformity€with€the€provisions€of€this€opinion.€ÏPetitioner€shall€still€be€entitled€to€visitation€with€Kyle€on€alternateÏweekends€in€Maury€County€from€Saturday€at€11:00€a.m.€to€5:00€p.m.€onÏSunday.€€In€case€of€any€€problems,€the€administration€of€this€order€shallÏbe€under€the€jurisdiction€of€the€trial€court€when€necessary.€€ÌÌà àAccordingly,€the€order€of€the€trial€court€is€reversed€and€remandedÏfor€the€reasons€and€under€the€circumstances€herein€set€forth€for€furtherÏproceedings€not€in€consistent€with€this€opinion.€€€Cost€in€this€cause€onÏappeal€will€be€taxed€one„half€to€petitioner€and€one€half€to€respondents,Ïfor€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHIGHERS,€J.€€€€€€€€€€€(CONCURS)ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àFARMER,€J.à à€€€€€(CONCURS)