ÿWPCÞV ]ÅI¹!H»gD“«=uqƒˆ’Aµ%Cý¿ÇãÒûˆ.÷‘ ìÒÝȦ ‹c…‡™udfÊR ‰Dˆ[–Àòp]h—)Í£wµ}u,’rªß‹ƒ¹ÒeCÖ²r€ß•fc#O¾Ï#ŸŒO}m¾œ˜ÛJ¸GyPœµŸÖêâ#«dwÂèGÓfK.Š/ñ¼°ÐcÖ2XNo ŒU :ûu5 ¾ª!Ùh&®A,çï2ØÖ4¾®7U:l<®¦<U:TCñŽCU:I®¹IU:gP AQ¡PÆòP 0D¸Q 0DüQ 0D@R D/„R B³R BÐRíR D3îSU:!T!T!T!T!T!T!T!T!T!T!T!Tb[T[T 0{cT˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ, øð AZ"Arial RegularX(ÞDz$¡¡Ñ  ÑÑ7€K<XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑTRY3Ø' LetterY3Ø' Letter 3Ø' Letter 3Ø' LetterTÑ ‘ ’ D“ D” D• D– ˜ ™ Dš Ó€¤ F&3|x¤  „Ý ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€relocation€was€acknowledged€by€the€North€Carolina€court€in€its€March€1993€order:Ð ,  ÐÌà8 Ø àThat€the€[Wife]€has€testified€and€indicated€that€she€is€in€the€process€of€moving€toÏMemphis,€Tennessee€along€with€the€minor€child€.€.€.€,€and€that€the€reason€for€herÏrelocation€to€Memphis,€Tennessee€is€so€that€she€can€secure€employment,€since€theÏemployment€conditions€are€more€favorable€in€Memphis,€Tennessee,€than€in€Winston„¼Salem,€North€Carolina.€(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó YÝ ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€complaint€also€sought€to€enjoin€the€Husband€from€permitting€members€of€the€oppositeÐ ,  Ðsex€from€staying€overnight€with€him€when€the€child€was€present. „Ý ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€petition€only€references€the€November€22,€1994€order€increasing€the€Husbandððs€alimonyÐ ,  Ðand€child€support€obligations€and€not€the€November€22,€1994€order€finding€the€Wife€to€be€in€contempt. 6Ý ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Husband€filed€a€copy€of€this€order€as€part€of€a€motion€for€consideration€of€post„judgmentÐ ,  Ðfacts,€which€we€grant. ]Ý ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝAmong€reasons€articulated€by€the€court€include€the€finding€that€ð ðthe€[Wife]€has€demonstratedÐ ,  Ða€pattern€of€violations€of€the€decrees€of€this€Court€adversely€affecting€the€relationship€between€theÏminor€child€and€her€father.€€Specifically,€the€[Wife]€has€denied€access€of€the€minor€child€to€theÏ[Husband]€and€of€the€[Husband]€to€the€minor€child€on€approximately€half€of€the€[Husbandððs]€scheduledÏvisits.ðð òÝ ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Wife€also€filed€a€motion€for€consideration€of€post„judgment€facts€in€which€she€states€thatÐ ,  Ðan€August€27,€1997€North€Carolina€order€exists€requiring€the€Wife€to€have€supervised€visitation€withÏNatalie.€€Although€a€copy€of€this€alleged€order€is€not€attached,€the€Husband€does€not€dispute€itsÏexistence. 4Ý ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝFor€a€thorough€discussion€of€the€objective€of€the€UCCJA€and€its€interplay€with€the€PKPA,€òòseeóóÐ ,  ÐòòBrown€v.€Brownóó,€847€S.W.2d€496,€498„503€(Tenn.€1993);€Kimberly€H.€Harris,€Note,€òòInterstate€ChildÐ ì À ÐCustody€Disputes:€A€Practical€Guide€for€Tennessee€Attorneys€on€the€Law€of€Jurisdictionóó,€24€Mem.€St.Ð ¬ € ÐU.€L.€Rev.€533€(1994). e Ý ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Wife€cites€28€U.S.C.A.€ðð€1738A(d)€(Supp.€1999),€which€provides€that€ð ð[t]he€jurisdictionÐ ,  Ðof€a€court€of€a€State€which€has€made€a€child€custody€or€visitation€determination€consistently€with€theÏprovisions€of€this€section€continues€as€long€as€[such€State€continues€to€have€jurisdiction€under€theÏlaws€of€that€State]€.€.€.€and€such€State€remains€the€residence€of€the€child€or€any€contestant.ðð€€NorthÏCarolinaððs€version€of€the€UCCJA€provides€that€North€Carolina€retains€jurisdiction€over€child€custodyÏso€long€as:ÌÌà8 Ø àà 0 à(1)€This€State€(i)€is€the€home€state€of€the€child€at€the€time€of€commencementÏof€the€proceeding,€or€(ii)€had€been€the€child's€home€state€within€six€months€beforeÏcommencement€of€the€proceeding€and€the€child€is€absent€from€this€State€because€ofÏthe€child's€removal€or€retention€by€a€person€claiming€the€child's€custody€or€for€otherÏreasons,€and€a€parent€or€person€acting€as€parent€continues€to€live€in€this€State;€orÐ Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø àà 0 à(2)€It€is€in€the€best€interest€of€the€child€that€a€court€of€this€State€assumeÏjurisdiction€because€(i)€the€child€and€the€child's€parents,€or€the€child€and€at€least€oneÏcontestant,€have€a€significant€connection€with€this€State,€and€(ii)€there€is€available€inÏthis€State€substantial€evidence€relevant€to€the€child's€present€or€future€care,Ïprotection,€training,€and€personal€relationships;€orÐ Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø àà 0 à(3)€The€child€is€physically€present€in€this€State€and€(i)€the€child€has€beenÏabandoned€or€(ii)€it€is€necessary€in€an€emergency€to€protect€the€child€because€theÏchild€has€been€subjected€to€or€threatened€with€mistreatment€or€abuse€or€is€otherwiseÏneglected€or€dependent;€orÐ Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø àà 0 à(4)€(i)€It€appears€that€no€other€state€would€have€jurisdiction€underÏprerequisites€substantially€in€accordance€with€paragraphs€(1),€(2),€or€(3),€or€anotherÏstate€has€declined€to€exercise€jurisdiction€on€the€ground€that€this€State€is€the€moreÏappropriate€forum€to€determine€the€custody€of€the€child,€and€(ii)€it€is€in€the€bestÏinterest€of€the€child€that€this€court€assume€jurisdiction.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ѐ€€ÌN.C.€Gen.€Stat.€ðð€50A„3€(1989).,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular kÝ ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€petition€only€referred€to€the€November€22,€1994€order€increasing€the€Husbandððs€alimonyÐ ,  Ðand€child€support€obligation€and€not€the€November€22,€1994€contempt€order. ´Ý ƒ9‡šÿÝÑ @ ÑÑ7À>úXXdìdì7ÑÑ @ ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑT@RY 3Ø' Letter3Ø' 3Ø'&Avery 5384 Name Tagÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÓ=€>úXÐXdÐd=ÓDuring€oral€argument,€the€Wife€conceded€that€North€Carolina€retains€jurisdiction€to€holdÐ ,  Ðparties€in€contempt€of€valid€orders.€€Because€we€find€that€the€Wife€is€now€judicially€estopped€fromÏarguing€the€invalidity€of€the€September€30,€1993€order,€it€follows€that€North€Carolina€seemingly€wouldÏhave€jurisdiction€to€hold€the€Wife€in€contempt€of€this€order.€€We€express€no€opinion€concerningÏwhether€the€orders€at€issue€would€be€void€under€the€PKPA€and€North€Carolina€law,€since€the€Wife€isÏestopped€from€presenting€this€argument.€€ ÏÓ=€>úÐXdÐd=ÓÝ ƒ9‡šÿÝÑ @ ÑÑ7À>úXXdìdì7ÑÑ @ ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑT@RY 3Ø' Letter3Ø' 3Ø'&Avery 5384 Name Tagÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€the€course€of€his€rebuttal€argument€during€oral€argument€before€this€Court,€the€HusbandÐ ,  Ðalso€asserted€that€the€Wife€may€not€argue€this€contention€because€she€did€not€assert€the€voidnessÏargument€in€her€brief.€€Although€the€Wife€drafted€her€brief€pro€se,€during€oral€argument€she€wasÏrepresented€by€counsel,€who€conceded€that€the€Wife€did€not€completely€and€coherently€articulate€thisÏargument€in€her€brief.€€While€it€is€true€that€issues€not€included€in€a€partyððs€brief€may€not€be€consideredÏon€appeal,€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(b);€òòFite€v.€State,€Bd.€of€Parolesóó,€925€S.W.2d€543,€545€(Tenn.€App.Ð œ p Ð1996),€we€construe€the€Wifeððs€brief€to€sufficiently€allege€this€argument.€€We€further€note€that€thisÏargument€has€been€consistently€made€by€the€Wife€during€the€course€of€this€litigation.€ ¤Ý ƒ9‡šÿÝÑ @ ÑÑ7À>úXXdìdì7ÑÑ @ ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑT@RY 3Ø' Letter3Ø' 3Ø'&Avery 5384 Name Tagÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÓ=€>úXÐXdÐd=ÓThe€suggestion€has€been€made€that€the€Wifeððs€April€18,€1995€petition€only€sought€toÐ ,  Ðincorporate€the€orders€of€the€North€Carolina€court€dated€September€30,€1993€and€November€22,€1994,Ïto€the€extent€that€they€addressed€issues€of€alimony€and€child€support.€€However,€a€plain€reading€ofÏthe€Wifeððs€April€18,€1995€petition,€discussing€at€length€the€custody€arrangement€and€visitationÏschedule€set€forth€in€the€September€30,€1993€order,€clearly€indicates€that€the€Wife€was€seeking€toÏincorporate€all€aspects€of€the€North€Carolina€courtððs€directives€in€these€orders.€€In€fact,€absolutely€noÏlanguage€in€the€petition€avers€that€the€latter€North€Carolina€orders€should€be€incorporated€to€the€extentÏthat€they€address€child€support€and€alimony.€€Moreover,€this€argument€was€never€espoused€by€theÏWife€in€her€briefs€before€this€Court€or€the€Court€of€Appeals,€nor€do€her€briefs€allege€that€the€trial€courtÏacted€improperly€in€dismissing€her€claims€for€a€modification€of€the€Husbandððs€alimony€and€childÏsupport€obligation.€€€ ÝÝ ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€further€note€that€the€phrase€ð ð[u]nless€required€in€the€interest€of€the€childðð€refers€only€toÐ ,  Ðthe€first€sentence€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„209(b),€which€requires€mandatory€declination,€and€notÏthe€second€sentence€of€the€provision€which€is€applicable€in€the€present€case.€ ÎÝ ƒ9‡š$ÝÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€ôÑ›ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý"Home€stateðð€is€defined€as€ð ðthe€state€in€which€the€child€immediately€preceding€the€timeÐ ,  Ðinvolved€lived€with€such€child's€parents,€a€parent€or€a€person€acting€as€parent,€for€at€least€six€(6)Ïconsecutive€months,€and€in€the€case€of€a€child€less€than€six€(6)€months€old€the€state€in€which€the€childÏlived€from€birth€with€any€of€the€persons€mentioned.€€Periods€of€temporary€absence€of€any€of€theÏnamed€persons€are€counted€as€part€of€the€six€(6)€months€or€other€period.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„¼202(5).ÌÌà Ø à€ ´Ó=€ ÐXdÐd=ÓÝ ƒ9èÿÝÑ @ ÑÑ7ÀXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑT@RY3Ø' Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÔ€ô”ûôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝDuring€oral€argument,€the€Wife€conceded€that€North€Carolina€retains€jurisdiction€to€holdÐ ,  Ðparties€in€contempt€of€valid€orders.€€Because€we€find€that€the€Wife€is€now€judicially€estopped€fromÏarguing€the€invalidity€of€the€September€30,€1993€order,€it€follows€that€North€Carolina€seemingly€wouldÏhave€jurisdiction€to€hold€the€Wife€in€contempt€of€this€order.€€We€express€no€opinion€concerning€whetherÏthe€orders€at€issue€would€be€void€under€the€PKPA€and€North€Carolina€law,€since€the€Wife€is€estoppedÏfrom€presenting€this€argument.€€, øð AZ"Arial Regular ¤Ó=€ ÐXdÐd=ÓÝ ƒ9èÿÝÑ @ ÑÑ7ÀXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑT@RY3Ø' Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÔ€ô”ûôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€suggestion€has€been€made€that€the€Wifeððs€April€18,€1995€petition€only€sought€toÐ ,  Ðincorporate€the€orders€of€the€North€Carolina€court€dated€September€30,€1993€and€November€22,€1994,Ïto€the€extent€that€they€addressed€issues€of€alimony€and€child€support.€€However,€a€plain€reading€of€theÏWifeððs€April€18€1995,€petition,€discussing€at€length€the€custody€arrangement€and€visitation€schedule€setÏforth€in€the€September€30,€1993€order,€clearly€indicates€that€the€Wife€was€seeking€to€incorporate€allÏaspects€of€the€North€Carolina€courtððs€directives€in€these€orders.€€In€fact,€absolutely€no€language€in€theÏpetition€avers€that€the€latter€North€Carolina€orders€should€be€incorporated€to€the€extent€that€theyÏaddress€child€support€and€alimony.€€Moreover,€this€argument€was€never€espoused€by€the€Wife€in€herÏbriefs€before€this€Court€or€the€Court€of€Appeals,€nor€do€her€briefs€allege€that€the€trial€court€actedÏimproperly€in€dismissing€her€claims€for€a€modification€of€the€Husbandððs€alimony€and€child€supportÏobligation.€€€, øð AZ"Arial Regular çÓ=€ ÐXdÐd=ÓÝ ƒ9èÿÝÑ @ ÑÑ7ÀXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑT@RY3Ø' Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÔ€ôãôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€the€course€of€his€rebuttal€argument€during€oral€argument€before€this€Court,€the€HusbandÐ ,  Ðalso€asserted€that€the€Wife€may€not€argue€this€contention€because€she€did€not€assert€the€voidnessÏargument€in€her€brief.€€Although€the€Wife€drafted€her€brief€pro€se,€during€oral€argument€she€wasÐ ¼   Ðrepresented€by€counsel,€who€conceded€that€the€Wife€did€not€completely€and€coherently€articulate€thisÏargument€in€her€brief.€€While€it€is€true€that€issues€not€included€in€a€partyððs€brief€may€not€be€consideredÏon€appeal,€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(b);€òòFite€v.€State,€Bd.€of€Parolesóó,€925€S.W.2d€543,€545€(Tenn.€App.Ð ¼  Ð1996),€we€construe€the€Wifeððs€brief€to€sufficiently€allege€this€argument.€€We€further€note€that€thisÏargument€has€been€consistently€made€by€the€Wife€during€the€course€of€this€litigation.€, øð AZ"Arial Regular ¤Ý ƒ9èÿÝÑ @ ÑÑ7ÀXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑT@RY3Ø' Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÔ€ ôãôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÓ=€ XÐXdÐd=ÓThe€suggestion€has€been€made€that€the€Wifeððs€April€18,€1995€petition€only€sought€toÐ ,  Ðincorporate€the€orders€of€the€North€Carolina€court€dated€September€30,€1993€and€November€22,€1994,Ïto€the€extent€that€they€addressed€issues€of€alimony€and€child€support.€€However,€a€plain€reading€of€theÏWifeððs€April€18€1995,€petition,€discussing€at€length€the€custody€arrangement€and€visitation€schedule€setÏforth€in€the€September€30,€1993€order,€clearly€indicates€that€the€Wife€was€seeking€to€incorporate€allÏaspects€of€the€North€Carolina€courtððs€directives€in€these€orders.€€In€fact,€absolutely€no€language€in€theÏpetition€avers€that€the€latter€North€Carolina€orders€should€be€incorporated€to€the€extent€that€theyÏaddress€child€support€and€alimony.€€Moreover,€this€argument€was€never€espoused€by€the€Wife€in€herÏbriefs€before€this€Court€or€the€Court€of€Appeals,€nor€do€her€briefs€allege€that€the€trial€court€actedÏimproperly€in€dismissing€her€claims€for€a€modification€of€the€Husbandððs€alimony€and€child€supportÏobligation.€€€, øð AZ"Arial Regular"#$%&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd d ÷Ý ƒ#¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€+X:´XXXÔÔ€+3Q X+X:´ÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€+X:´X +3QÔÐ  ÐÌMay€24,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó(((('ÿÿdxd,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù-(+(2ÃÓ$¤¤Ý ƒDz!ÝÑ  ÑÑ7€Ë'XXdðdð7ÑÑ  ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑTRY$3Ø' Letter3Ø'3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÝ  ÝÓÓÔ€ôä–ôXXÔà Ø àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÝ ƒDz!ÝÑ  ÑÑ7€Ë'XXdðdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓÓÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÓ  ÓÑTRY$3Ø' Letter3Ø'3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÝ  Ýñš ñ›ñš ñÑ, °ÑÑ` °ÑÑ€7ÑÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ LegalY$3Ø' Letter AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' LetterTÑÔ‡X:´XXXÔÓÓÓ=€Ë'XÐXdÐd=Óñ¤ ññš ñßr€!)*<,(j 8` `€€@E»- ` 8ttxPó, ð  rßñš ññ¤ ññ¤ ññ¤ ññš ñ›ñš ñà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àà H! àœà  # àà@Ø Ø Ìàò òIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ,  Ðñ¤ ñßt€!)*>.*jx6¾` `€€@EîÐ ` 8ttxP& ð ¾ tßñ¤ ñà@HH)ÌàAT€JACKSONó óˆÐ  æ ÐÌÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àòòFOR€PUBLICATIONóóÐ °„ ÐÌLORRAINE€BURTON€SPIERSà 8 àà  à)à è àò òFiled:€May€24,€1999ó óÐ |P ÐMARCUS,à 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ð h< Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àPlaintiff/Appellee,à à àà 8 àà  à)à è àSHELBY€COUNTYÐ 4  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìv.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àHon.€Floyd€PeeteÐ Ô  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àChancellorÐ æº  ÐTRENT€WRIGHT€MARCUS,à 8 àà  à)Ð Ì   Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÔ#†XË'XXX:´ƒ#ÔÔ‡X:´XXXË'ÔSupreme€CourtÐ ²†  Ðà Ø àDefendant/Appellant.à 8 àà  à)à è àNo.€02S01„9804„CH„00036Ô#†XË'XXX:´ #ÔÔ‡X:´XXXË'ÔÐ ˜l Ðà Ø àòòÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌFOR€APPELLANTà ˆ àóóà à àà 8 àà  àà è àà @ àòòà ˜ àFOR€APPELLEEóóÐ ”!h ÐDaniel€Loyd€Taylorà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àà @ àà ˜ àCaren€B.€NicholÐ z"N ÐCraig€B.€Flood,€IIà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àà @ àà ˜ àÔ#†XË'XXX:´Ð #ÔÔ‡X:´XXXË'ÔMemphis,€TNà  # àÐ `#4 ÐMemphis,€TNÌÔ‡„©,„XX:´ÔÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÔ#†X:´X„„©, #ÔÔ‡„©,„XX:´Ôà@VV(Ìàò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óÔ#†X:´X„„©,\ #ԈРV1*'' ÐÌÌÌñ™ ñÌñ™ ñCOURT€OF€APPEALS€REVERSED,ÌTRIAL€COURT€JUDGMENT€REINSTATED.à è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àDROWOTA,€J.ñ“ ñÐ >7-- Ðñ“ ñÔ#†XË'XXX:´º #ÔÐ  R6&,,9 ÐÓÓà Ø àIn€this€case,€we€consider€whether€the€Chancery€Court€of€Shelby€CountyÏabused€its€discretion€in€declining€jurisdiction€of€a€suit€for€the€modification€of€childÏcustody.€€Apparently€finding€that€the€plaintiff€was€barred€from€filing€suit€in€TennesseeÏdue€to€her€violation€of€previous€child€support€orders€entered€in€North€Carolina,€theÏtrial€court€dismissed€the€plaintiffððs€complaint.€€The€Court€of€Appeals€reversed.€ÏBecause€we€find€that€the€trial€court€acted€within€its€discretion€as€set€forth€in€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€36„6„209(b)€(1996),€we€reverse€the€Court€of€Appeals€and€reinstate€theÏtrial€courtððs€order€dismissing€the€plaintiffððs€complaint.€€€€ÌÌà@22%Ìàò òPROCEDURAL€HISTORYó óˆÐ  à Ðà Ø àPlaintiff/Appellee€Lorraine€Burton€Spiers€Marcus€(ð ðthe€Wifeðð)€andÏDefendant/Appellant€Trent€Wright€Marcus€(ð ðthe€Husbandðð)€were€married€in€MemphisÏin€1990.€€Shortly€thereafter,€the€parties€moved€to€Winston„Salem,€North€Carolina,Ïwhere€the€Husband€was€attending€medical€school.€€The€partiesðð€only€child,€NatalieÏSpiers€Marcus,€was€born€in€November€of€1991.€€The€parties€separated€in€the€Fall€ofÏ1992.€€ÌÌà Ø àIn€response€to€a€petition€filed€by€the€Husband€seeking€custody€of€the€child€andÏa€counterpetition€filed€by€the€Wife€seeking€custody,€child€support,€and€alimony,€aÏNorth€Carolina€court€entered€an€order€on€March€16,€1993.€€In€this€order,€the€NorthÏCarolina€court€found:ÌÓ Óà8 Ø àThat€both€the€[Husband]€and€the€[Wife]€are€fit€and€proper€parents€toÏhave€the€joint€legal€care,€custody,€and€control€of€the€minor€child.€€ThatÏit€would€be€in€the€best€interests€of€the€minor€child€that€her€primaryÏphysical€care,€custody,€and€control€be€awarded€to€the€[Wife]€subject€toÏsecondary€physical€custody€with€the€[Husband]€as€set€out€herein.ÐL5 +.Ø À!Ø À! ЇÓÓThe€court€set€forth€a€visitation€schedule€and€awarded€alimony€and€child€support€toÏthe€Wife.€€ÌÌà Ø àAround€January€of€1993,€shortly€before€this€North€Carolina€order€was€entered,Ïthe€Wife€and€the€child€relocated€to€Memphis.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€July€of€1993,€the€Husband€movedÐ Œ` Ðto€Arkansas,€where€he€filed€a€suit€for€divorce,€division€of€property,€and€a€finding€thatÏneither€party€was€entitled€to€alimony.€€An€Arkansas€court€granted€the€Wifeððs€motionÏto€dismiss€all€of€the€Husbandððs€requests€for€relief€except€for€divorce.€€The€ArkansasÏcourt€scheduled€a€hearing€on€the€complaint€for€divorce€in€December€of€1994.ÌÌà Ø àWhile€these€proceedings€were€occurring€in€Arkansas,€the€Husband€also€filedÏa€petition€in€North€Carolina€to€alter€the€March€1993€order.€€Following€a€hearing€onÏthis€motion€in€which€both€parties€were€represented€by€counsel,€the€North€CarolinaÏcourt,€on€September€30,€1993,€entered€an€order€setting€forth€a€more€specificÏvisitation€schedule.€€The€order€stated€that€all€other€aspects€of€the€March€1993€orderÏwould€remain€in€effect€and€that€ð ðthis€cause€is€retained€for€further€orders€of€this€Court.ðð€ÏÌÌà Ø àIn€response€to€a€show€cause€motion€filed€by€the€Husband,€the€North€CarolinaÏcourt,€on€November€22,€1994,€entered€an€order€finding€that€the€Wife€was€in€civil€andÏcriminal€contempt€for€failure€to€adhere€to€the€visitation€schedule€set€forth€in€theÐ  /à$( ÐSeptember€1993€order.€€The€North€Carolina€court€ordered€that€the€Wife€beÏincarcerated€until€she€complied€and€that€she€pay€for€the€Husbandððs€attorneyððs€fees.€ÏAlthough€the€Wife€was€not€present€during€this€hearing,€she€was€represented€byÏcounsel.€€Interestingly,€another€order€was€also€entered€by€a€different€North€CarolinaÏjudge€on€the€same€date,€November€22,€1994.€€The€order€stated€that€it€was€inÏresponse€to€the€Husbandððs€ð ðMotion€for€Review,€requesting,€among€other€things,Ïmodification€of€[the€Husbandððs]€secondary€physical€custody€and€termination€of€[theÏWifeððs]€alimony.ðð€€The€order€further€stated€that€the€Wife€ð ðappeared€in€CourtÏrepresented€by€her€attorneys.ðð€€This€order€made€no€reference€to€the€contempt€orderÏor€any€allegation€that€the€Wife€had€failed€to€comply€with€the€visitation€schedule.€€TheÏNorth€Carolina€court€simply€reaffirmed€the€existing€joint€custody€arrangement,Ïincreased€the€Husbandððs€alimony€and€child€support€obligation,€and€directed€that€heÏpay€the€Wifeððs€attorneyððs€fees.€€The€order€noted€that€although€both€parties€were€livingÏout„of„state,€they€were€residents€of€North€Carolina€six€months€prior€to€the€filing€of€theÏaction.ÌÌà Ø àThe€record€includes€an€additional€contempt€order€entered€by€the€NorthÏCarolina€court€on€December€16,€1994.€€Although€the€Wife€was€not€present,€she€wasÏrepresented€by€counsel€at€the€hearing.€€Asserting€that€it€retained€jurisdiction€over€theÏmatter,€the€North€Carolina€court€found€that€the€Wife€had€ð ðwillfully€and€intentionallyÏviolatedðð€the€September€30,€1993€order€relating€to€the€visitation€schedule€and€theÏNovember€22,€1994€contempt€order.€€The€court€again€found€the€Wife€to€be€in€civilÏand€criminal€contempt,€ordered€that€she€be€incarcerated,€and€directed€that€she€payÏthe€Husbandððs€attorneyððs€fees.Ð ”4h*. Їà Ø àA€few›€days€later,€on€December€21,€1994,€the€Arkansas€court€held€a€hearingÏregarding€the€Husbandððs€petition€for€divorce.€€After€finding€that€the€Husband€was€aÏresident€of€Arkansas€and,€thus,€that€the€court€had€jurisdiction,€the€court€granted€theÏHusband€a€divorce€ð ðon€the€ground€of€general€indignities,ðð€but€refused€to€make€aÏruling€ð ðon€any€other€matter.ðð€€This€order€was€entered€January€11,€1995.ÌÌà Ø àMeanwhile,€on€December€19,€1994,€the€Wife€filed€a€complaint€for€divorce€andÏinjunctive€relief€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€Shelby€County,€Tennessee.€€The€complaintÏsought€a€divorce,€a€division€of€property,€an€award€of€child€support€and€alimony,€andÏa€finding€that€the€Wife€was€entitled€to€custody€of€Natalie.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Wifeððs€complaintРĘ Ðincludes€the€following€statement:ÌÓÓÌà8 Ø àà 0 àPlaintiff€is€aware€of,€and€calls€this€courtððs€attention€to,€a€custodyÏorder€which€was€entered€on€March€16,€1993,€by€the€General€Court€ofÏJustice,€District€Court€Division,€Forsyth€County,€North€Carolina,€DocketÏnumber€92€CVD€6246.€€The€Order€awarded€legal€custody€of€the€partiesððÏminor€child€jointly€to€the€Plaintiff€and€Defendant.€€It€further€awardedÏprimary€physical€care,€custody€and€control€of€the€minor€child€to€PlaintiffÏand€secondary€physical€custody€to€the€Defendant.€€No€divorce€actionÏis€pending€in€North€Carolina.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌà8 Ø àà 0 àPlaintiff€avers€that€the€North€Carolina€Court€has€continued€toÏexercise€jurisdiction€over€the€custody€issue€although€it€does€not€haveÏthe€authority€to€do€so.€€Plaintiff€further€avers€that€pursuant€toÏTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€36„6„207(a)€and€the€FederalÏParental€Kidnapping€Prevention€Act,€U.S.C.€1738A,€the€North€CarolinaÏCourt€is€not€ð ðexercising€jurisdiction€substantially€in€conformity€with€thisÏpartðð€in€that€(1)€neither€of€the€parties€is€a€domiciliary€of€the€state€ofÏNorth€Carolina,€(2)€neither€party€continues€to€reside€in€North€Carolina,Ïas€the€Plaintiff€left€the€state€on€December€30,€1992€and€the€DefendantÏleft€the€state€on€July€1,€1993,€and€(3)€Tennessee€is€the€ð ðhome€stateðð€ofÏthe€partiesðð€child.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌÓÓÐ ¼2(, Ðà Ø àOn€April€18,€1995,€the€Wife€filed€in€the€Chancery€Court€a€ð ðPetition€to€EnrollÏand€Modify€Foreign€Decrees€and€for€Injunctive€Relief.ðð€€Attached€as€exhibits€to€theÏpetition€were€the€North€Carolina€court€orders€dated€March€16,€1993,€September€30,Ï1993,€and€November€22,€1994,׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€as€well€as€the€Arkansas€court€orders€datedÐ ´ˆ ÐNovember€10,€1993€and€January€11,€1995.€€The€petition€alleged€that€these€fiveÏorders€ð ðare€entitled€to€full€faith€and€credit€in€the€courts€of€the€State€of€Tennessee.ðð€ÏThe€petition€further€alleged€that€a€material€change€of€circumstances€had€occurredÏsince€the€entry€of€these€out„of„state€orders€so€as€to€warrant€the€Wife€being€awardedÏsole€custody€of€the€child.ÌÌà Ø àIn€response€to€a€motion€to€dismiss€filed€by€the€Husband,€the€Chancery€CourtÏof€Shelby€County€held€a€hearing€on€this€matter€on€August€31,€1995.€€At€the€hearing,Ïcounsel€for€the€Husband€cited€the€contempt€orders€entered€by€the€North€CarolinaÏcourt€and€contended€that€the€Shelby€County€trial€court€should€refuse€to€exerciseÏjurisdiction€due€to€the€Wifeððs€ð ðunclean€hands.ðð€€The€Wife€responded€that€theÏcontempt€orders€were€void€because€North€Carolina€did€not€have€jurisdiction€over€theÏout„of„state€parties.€€On€November€14,€1995,€the€Chancery€Court€of€Shelby€CountyÏgranted€the€Husbandððs€motion€to€dismiss€in€a€non„specific€order.€€Subsequently,€theÏWife€filed€a€motion€to€alter€or€amend,€which€was€denied€by€the€trial€court.ÌÌà Ø àWhile€this€action€was€being€appealed€to€the€Tennessee€Court€of€Appeals,Ïâ âanother€order€was€entered€by€the€North€Carolina€court€on€January€9,€1997€pursuantÐ ä0¸&* Ðto€a€change€of€custody€motion€filed€by€the€Husband.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Prior€to€a€hearing€on€theÐ ,  Ðâ âmatter,€the€court€granted€a€motion€to€withdraw€filed€by€counsel€for€the€Wife€andÏsigned€by€the€Wife.€€The€Wife€did€not€appear€at€the€hearing€on€this€motion€and,€thus,Ïneither€the€Wife€nor€her€counsel€were€present.€€The€order€refers€to€the€litigationÏhistory€as€well€as€the€Chancery€Court€of€Shelby€Countyððs€action€ð ðdeferring€this€matterÏto€the€North€Carolina€Court€which€has€retained€jurisdiction€over€the€partiesðð€minorÏchild,€Natalie.ðð€€Finding€that€a€ð ðsubstantial€and€material€change€of€circumstancesÏjustifying€a€modificationðð€of€the€North€Carolina€courtððs€previous€orders€exists,€theÏNorth€Carolina€court€awarded€custody€of€the€child€to€the€Husband.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€court€alsoÐ ìÀ Ðordered€that€the€Husbandððs€child€support€obligations€should€be€stayed.€€DespiteÏinsisting€that€the€North€Carolina€courtððs€actions€were€void,€the€Wife€agreed€to€turnÏover€physical€custody€of€the€child€to€the€Husband.׃H×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð tH ÐÌà Ø àOn€July€1,€1997,€the€Tennessee€Court€of€Appeals€reversed€the€ChanceryÏCourt€of€Shelby€Countyððs€dismissal€of€the€Wifeððs€complaint.€€Despite€labeling€theÏWifeððs€defiance€of€the€North€Carolina€orders€as€ð ðclearly€reprehensible,ðð€the€Court€ofÏAppeals€found€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 Ø àBut€she€cannot€now€be€repelled€because€of€the€offense€she€offered€toÏthe€North€Carolina€Court,€òòseeóó,€òòHaynes€v.€Haynesóó,€904€S.W.2d€118Ð p*D # Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995),€since€our€primary€concern€is€for€the€bestÏinterests€of€the€child.€€It€is€at€this€juncture€that€we€emphasize€that€theÏchild€and€Wife€have€been€residents€of€Tennessee€since€January€1993,Ïand€Husband€a€resident€of€Arkansas€since€July,€1993.€€North€CarolinaÏhas€no€vested€jurisdictional€interest,€and€neither€Wife€nor€Husband€norÏthe€child€has€a€'significant€connection'€with€that€State.€€N.C.€Gen.€Stat.Ï50€A-3(2)€(1989).€€Moreover,€the€òòcustodyóó€of€the€child€is€not€an€issueÐ ´ˆ Ðbefore€us;€€rather,€whether€or€not€the€North€Carolina€Orders€may€beÏfiled€in€Tennessee€is€the€sole€issue.€€òòState€ex€rel.€Cooper€v.€Hamiltonóó,Ð Œ` Ð688€S.W.2d€821€(Tenn.1985)€is€the€authority€for€the€conclusion€thatÏwhere€all€persons€involved€have€moved€away,€jurisdiction€to€modifyÏcustodial€decrees€will€shift€elsewhere.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðœñ” ñÌñ” ñ›Ìà8 Ø àà 0 àGiven€the€record€before€us€we€are€not€aware€of€any€reason€whyÏthe€North€Carolina€Orders€are€not€entitled€to€full€faith€and€credit€inÏTennessee,€T.C.A.€36-6-214;€òòBrown€v.€Brownóó,€847€S.W.2d€496€(Tenn.Ð Ô  Ð1993),€and€thus€eligible€for€filing€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€ShelbyÏCounty,€Tennessee€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€36-6-216.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌà8 Ø àà 0 àThe€sole€purpose€of€this€legal€exercise€by€the€Wife€appears€toÏbe€an€effort€to€salvage€the€issue€of€permanent€alimony,€since€theÏdivorce€judgment€rendered€by€the€Arkansas€Court€has€become€final,Ïand€the€issue€of€custody€may€be€litigated€in€the€child's€home€state€inÏaccordance€with€the€laws€of€Tennessee.€€As€to€the€efficacy€of€thisÏstratagem€we€express€no€opinion€and€offer€no€critique.€€Suffice€to€stateÏthat€a€judgment€which€cannot€be€enforced€is€worthless,€and€that€theÏNorth€Carolina€judgments,€when€filed€in€Tennessee€at€the€behest€ofÏWife€are€amenable€to€enforcement€ab€initio.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌÓÓ€€Ìà@dd)Ìàò òDISCUSSIONˆÐ À&” Ðà Ø àó óOn€appeal,€the€Husband€contends€that€the€Chancery€Court€of€Shelby€CountyÐ ¨(|! Ðacted€within€its€discretion€in€dismissing€the€Wifeððs€complaint.€€Adopted€by€theÏGeneral€Assembly€in€1979,€Tennesseeððs€version€of€the€Uniform€Child€CustodyÏJurisdictional€Act€(ð ðUCCJAðð),€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€36„6„201€òòetóó€òòseq.óó€(1996€&€Supp.Ð 0.$' Ð1998),€when€construed€in€conjunction€with€the€federal€Parental€KidnappingÏâ âPrevention€Act€(ð ðPKPAðð),€28€U.S.C.A.€ðððð€1738A€et€seq.€(1994€&€Supp.€1999),€isÐ à1´'+ Ðdesigned€to€avoid€jurisdictional€controversies€between€other€states€when€consideringÏchild€custody€disputes.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„201(a)€(1996).œ×ƒ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  כР Ø Ðâ âÌà Ø àUnder€Tennesseeððs€version€of€the€UCCJA,€a€trial€court€may€exerciseÏjurisdiction€to€enforce€an€initial€child€custody€decree€or€modify€an€existing€childÏcustody€decree€in€the€event€that€Tennessee€ð ðis€the€home€state€of€the€child€at€the€timeÏof€commencement€of€the€proceeding.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„203(a)(1)(A)€(1996).€ÏThere€is€little€dispute€that€at€the€time€the€order€was€entered€by€the€Chancery€CourtÏof€Shelby€œCounty›€in€November€of€1995,€Tennessee€was€the€childððs€ð ðhome€state,ðð€asÏdefined€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„202(5)€(1996).œ×ƒ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›€€The€UCCJA,€however,€alsoРĘ Ðprovides€that€a€trial€court€that€would€otherwise€retain€jurisdiction€under€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€36„6„203€may,€nevertheless,€decline€jurisdiction€under€certain€circumstances.€ÏThus,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„209€(1996),€provides€as€follows:Ìœñ• ñÌñ• ñ›ÓÓà8 Ø à(a)€If€the€petitioner€for€an€initial€decree€has€wrongfully€taken€the€childÏfrom€another€state€or€has€engaged€in€similar€reprehensible€conduct,Ïthe€court€may€decline€to€exercise€jurisdiction€if€this€is€just€and€properÏunder€the€circumstances.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌà8 Ø à(b)€Unless€required€in€the€interest€of€the€child€and€subject€to€ððÏ36-6-215(a),€the€court€shall€not€exercise€its€jurisdiction€to€modify€aÏcustody€decree€of€another€state€if€the€petitioner,€without€consent€of€theÏperson€entitled€to€custody,€has€improperly€removed€the€child€from€theÏphysical€custody€of€the€person€entitled€to€custody€or€has€improperlyÐ p*D # Ðretained€the€child€after€a€visit€or€other€temporary€relinquishment€ofÏphysical€custody.€€If€the€petitioner€has€violated€any€other€provision€ofÏa€custody€decree€of€another€state,€the€court,€subject€to€ðð€36-6-215(a),Ïmay€decline€to€exercise€its€jurisdiction€if€this€is€just€and€proper€underÏthe€circumstances.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌÓÓÌà Ø àWith€the€exception€of€the€analytical€framework€in€the€first€sentence€ofÏsubsection€(b),€the€statutory€language€is€permissive.€€It€provides€that€a€trial€courtÏð ðòòmayóódeclineðð€to€exercise€its€jurisdiction€if€ð ðjust€and€proper€under€the€circumstances.ðð€Ð <  ÐòòId.óó(emphasis€added).€€The€trial€court€is€authorized€to€determine€what€is€the€ð ðjust€andÐ è  Ðproperðð€course€in€the€consideration€of€the€totality€of€the€circumstances,€and€theÏappropriate€standard€of€review€for€an€appellate€court€of€a€trial€courtððs€declination€ofÏjurisdiction€is€whether€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion.€€òòSeeóó€òòFalco€Adkins€v.€FalcoÐ œp ÐAntaparaóó,€850€S.W.2d€148,€153€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€Under€this€standard,€ð ð[a]nÐ tH Ðappellate€court€should€not€reverse€for€ððabuse€of€discretionðð€a€discretionary€judgmentÏof€a€trial€court€unless€it€affirmatively€appears€that€the€trial€court's€decision€wasÏagainst€logic€or€reasoning,€and€caused€an€injustice€or€injury€to€the€partyÏcomplaining.ðð€€òòBallard€v.€Herzkeóó,€924€S.W.2d€652,€661€(Tenn.€1996);€òòseeóóòòalsoóó€òòMyintÐ Ô%¨ Ðv.€Allstate€Ins.€Co.óó,€970€S.W.2d€920,€927€(Tenn.€1998);€òòDouglas€v.€Estate€ofÐ ¬'€  ÐRobertsonóó,€876€S.W.2d€95,€97€(Tenn.1994).Ð „)X" ÐÌà Ø àThe€Husband€contends€that€the€Court€of€Appeals€erred€in€finding€an€abuse€ofÏdiscretion€and€argues€that€the€trial€court€acted€within€its€discretion€in€decliningÏjurisdiction€due€to€the€Wifeððs€ð ðunclean€hands.ðð€€Emphasizing€that€North€Carolina€hasÏrepeatedly€held€the€Wife€in€contempt€for€violating€custody€orders,€the€HusbandÏargues€that€the€UCCJA€authorized€the€trial€court€to€decline€jurisdiction€because:€(1)Ð ”4h*. Ðthe€Wife€has€ð ðengaged€in€similar€reprehensible€conduct,ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„¼209(a);€and€(2)€the€Wife€ð ðhas€violated€any€other€provision€of€a€custody€decree€ofÏanother€state,ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„209(b).€€The€Wife€responds€that€the€NorthÏCarolina€contempt€orders€cited€by€the€Husband€found€her€in€contempt€of€void€ordersÏand,€thus,€her€violation€of€void€orders€does€not€constitute€ð ðreprehensible€conductðð€orÏa€ð ðviolat[ion]€.€.€.€of€a€custody€decree€of€another€state,ðð€in€accordance€with€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€36„6„209.ÌÌà Ø àWe€initially€note€that€the€Husbandððs€reliance€on€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„¼209(a)€is€misplaced.€€This€provision€involves€petitions€for€an€ð ðòòinitialóó€decreeðð€of€childРĘ Ðcustody.€€òòId.óó(emphasis€added);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ36„6„202(6).›€€BecauseÐ œp Ðit€is€uncontroverted€that€North€Carolina€entered€an€ð ðinitial€decreeðð€in€March€of€1993,ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„209(a)€is€inapplicable.€€Since€the€Wifeððs€complaint€in€theÏpresent€case€seeks€to€modify€an€out„of„state€decree,€our€analysis€must€proceedÏunder€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„209(b).€€ÌÌà Ø àClearly€on€its€face,€the€record€indicates€that€the€Wife€has€violated€an€out„of„¼state€custody€decree.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„209(b).€€One€of€the€North€CarolinaÏcontempt€orders€dated€November€22,€1994€finds€the€Wife€to€be€in€contempt€of€theÏSeptember€1993€North€Carolina€order.€€In€addition,€the€December€1994€NorthÏCarolina€order€found€the€Wife€to€be€in€contempt€of€the€September€1993€order€as€wellÏas€the€November€22,€1994€contempt€order.€€The€Wife€was€represented€by€counselÏat€these€contempt€proceedings.€€During€oral€argument€before€this€Court,€however,Ïcounsel€for€the€Wife€argued€that€these€orders€were€void€because,€under€the€termsÐ ”4h*. Ðof€the€PKPA,€the€North€Carolina€court€did€not€have€subject€matter€jurisdiction€at€theÏtimes€the€orders€subsequent€to€the€March€1993€order€were€entered.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€€€€Ð  Ø ÐÌà Ø àThe€Husband€responds€that€the€Wife€is€judicially€estopped€from€contendingÏthat€the€North€Carolina€orders€are€void€because€she€attempted€to€ð ðenrollðð€two€ofÏthese€orders€in€her€April€18,€1995€ð ðPetition€to€Enroll€and€Modify€Foreign€Decrees€andÏfor€Injunctive€Reliefðð€filed€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€Shelby€County.ñ– ñ׃@×ñ– ññ– ñ׃¨×ñ– ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€This€petition,Ð <  Ðœsworn€to›€under€oath€by€the€Wife,€referenced€the€North€Carolina€orders€dated€MarchÐ è  Ð16,€1993,€September€30,€1993,€and€November€22,€1994,׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€as€well€as€two€ArkansasÐ ,  Ðorders,€and€sought€the€ð ðenforcementðð€of€such€orders€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€ShelbyÏCounty.€€We€agree€that€judicial€estoppel€applies€in€this€case.€€ÌÌà Ø àUnder€the€doctrine€of€judicial€estoppel€ð ða€party€will€not€be€permitted€to€occupyÏinconsistent€positions€or€to€take€a€position€in€regard€to€a€matter€which€is€directlyÏcontrary€to,€or€inconsistent€with,€one€previously€assumed€by€him,€at€least€where€heÏhad,€or€was€chargeable€with,€full€knowledge€of€the€facts,€and€another€will€beÏprejudiced€by€this€action.ðð€€òòObion€County€v.€McKinnisóó,€364€S.W.2d€356,€357€(Tenn.Ð ìÀ Ð1962);€òòseeóóòòalsoóóòòLayhew€v.€Dixonóó,€527€S.W.2d€739,€741€(Tenn.€1975);€òòWerne€v.РĘ ÐSandersonóó,€954€S.W.2d€742,€745€(Tenn.€App.€1997).€€Designed€to€prevent€a€partyÐ œp Ðfrom€ð ðgaining€an€unfair€advantage,ðð€òòCarvell€v.€Bottomsóó,€900€S.W.2d€23,€30€(Tenn.Ð tH Ð1995),€the€indoctrination€of€judicial€estoppel€by€Tennessee€courts€has€been€cogentlyÏexplained€by€this€Court€in€òòSartain€v.€Dixie€Coal€&€Iron€Co.óó,€266€S.W.2d€313€(Tenn.Ð $"ø Ð1924):ÌÓÓà8 Ø àThe€distinctive€feature€of€the€Tennessee€law€of€judicial€estoppel€(orÏestoppel€by€oath)€is€the€expressed€purpose€of€the€court,€on€broadÏgrounds€of€public€policy,€to€uphold€the€sanctity€of€an€oath.€€The€swornÏstatement€is€not€merely€evidence€against€the€litigant,€but€(unlessÏexplained)€precludes€him€from€denying€its€truth.€€It€is€not€merely€anÏadmission,€but€an€absolute€bar.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌòòÓÓId.óó€at€318.Ð H,"% ÐÌà Ø àApplying€the€law€to€the€facts€of€this€case,€we€find€that€the€Wife€is€estoppedÏfrom€now€asserting€that€two€of€the€North€Carolina€orders€that€she€previously€soughtÐ Ð1¤'+ Ðto€enroll€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€Shelby€County€are€void.œñ ññ˜ ñ׃×ñ˜ ññ˜ ñ׃×ñ˜ ññ ññ ñ׃×ñ ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›€€Because€the€NorthÐ ,  ÐCarolina€court,€on€two€occasions,€found€the€Wife€to€be€in€violation€of€the€SeptemberÏ30,€1993€order,€which€the€Wife€previously€sought€to€enroll,€the€Chancery€Court€ofÏShelby€County€did€not€err€by€considering€these€contempt€orders€as€a€basis€forÏdeclining€to€exercise€jurisdiction€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„¼209(b).ñ ñ׃€ ×ñ ññ ñ׃( ×ñ ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рd8  ÐÌà Ø àà@..)Ìàò òCONCLUSIONˆÐ è  Ðà Ø àó óAfter€due€consideration€of€the€law€and€the€record€in€this€case,€we€find€that€theÐ üÐ Ðtrial€court€acted€within€its€discretion€in€finding€that€ð ðit€was€just€and€proper€under€theÏcircumstancesðð€to€decline€jurisdiction€due€to€the€Wifeððs€ð ðviolat[ion]€[of]€any€otherÏprovision€of€a€custody€decree€of€another€state.ðð׃È×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Therefore,€the€decision€of€theÐ „X ÐCourt€of€œAppeals›€œis›€reversed,€and€the€order€of€the€trial€court€dismissing€the€WifeððsÏcomplaint€is€reinstated.ÌÐ  $à Ðà Ø àCosts€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€Appellee,€Lorraine€Burton€Spiers€Marcus.ÌÌÔ‡X>úXXX>úÔà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 à_____________________________________Ð Ü ° ÐÓÓà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àFrank€F.€Drowota,€III,Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àJusticeÌÓ lÓÌò òÌœñ‘ ñConcurñ‘ ññ’ ñPanelñ’ ñ:›Ìó óÓÓAnderson,€C.J.Ð 4  ÐBirch,€Holder,€Barker,€J.J.Ô#†X>úXXX>úvk#Ô