Marriage of Purganan
Appellant Philemon Purganan appeals an order denying his request to vacate an October 2005 family court order that he pay respondent Yvonne Fernandes $1,000 a month in spousal support. Purganan contends the court erred by denying his request because the October 2005 order modified a 2001 Hawaii court's spousal support order in violation of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (the UIFSA; Fam. Code,[1] § 5700.101 et seq.), the family court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to make the order, and as a result the October 2005 order is void ab initio. We agree that under the UIFSA, the Hawaii court had exclusive continuing jurisdiction over the matter of spousal support and that the UIFSA precluded the San Diego Superior Court's modification of the Hawaii order. Because the court erred by denying Purganan's motion to vacate the October 2005 order, we reverse with directions set forth below.
Comments on Marriage of Purganan