TCA § 36-5-2210 — Application of parts 20-29 of this chapter to nonresident subject to personal jurisdiction

A tribunal of this state exercising personal jurisdiction over a nonresident in a proceeding under parts 20-29 of this chapter, under other law of this state relating to a support order, or recognizing a foreign support order may receive evidence from outside this state pursuant to § 36-5-2316 , communicate with a tribunal outside this state pursuant to § 36-5-2317 , and obtain discovery through a tribunal outside this state pursuant to § 36-5-2318 . In all other respects, parts 23-26 do not apply, and the tribunal shall apply the procedural and substantive law of this state. Acts 2010, ch. 901, § 1. Compiler's Notes. Part 20, § 36-5-2001 (Acts 1997, ch. 551, § 2), concerning the short title for title 36, ch. 5, parts 20-29, was repealed and reenacted by Acts 2010, ch. 901, § 1, upon completion of the provisions in § 2 of the act. Acts 2010, ch. 901, § 2, as amended by Acts 2016, ch. 664, § 4, provided that: “This act shall take effect when the department of human services files a notice with the secretary of state who shall publish the notice in the Tennessee Administrative Register on the secretary of state's web site, citing the effective date, which shall occur no later than April 1, 2016, the public welfare requiring it.” The date published by the secretary of state in the Tennessee Administrative Register was March 31, 2016. COMMENTS TO OFFICIAL TEXT Assertion of long-arm jurisdiction over a nonresident results in a one-state proceeding without regard to the fact that one of the parties resides in a different state or in a foreign country. On obtaining personal jurisdiction the tribunal must apply the law of the forum. Once personal jurisdiction has been asserted over a nonresident, the issuing tribunal retains continuing, exclusive jurisdiction (CEJ) to modify, and continuing jurisdiction to enforce a support order in accordance with the provisions of the act. Of course, it is far more common for a support order to be issued in conjunction with a divorce or determination of parentage in which both the obligor and obligee are residents of the forum than to be issued as a result of an assertion of long-arm jurisdiction. Note that either the petitioner or the respondent may be the nonresident party (either of whom may be the obligor or the obligee). Also note that absent this provision, the ordinary intrastate substantive and procedural law of the forum would apply to either fact situation without reference to the fact that one of the parties is a nonresident. Thus, CEJ applies whether the matter at hand involves establishment of an original support order or enforcement or modification of an existing order. In any event, if one of the parties resides outside the forum state, the nonresident may avail himself or herself of the special evidentiary and discovery provisions provided by UIFSA. This section makes clear that the special rules of evidence and procedure identified in Sections 316, 317, and 318 [T.C.A. §§ 36-5-2316 , 36-5-2317 , and 36-5-2318 ] are applicable in a case involving a nonresident of the forum state. Section 316 [T.C.A. § 36-5-2316 ] facilitates decision-making when a party or a child resides “outside this state” by providing special rules to recognize the impediments to presenting evidence caused by nonresident status. Note the terminology has the broadest possible application, i.e., worldwide. The improved interstate and international exchange of information enables the nonresident to participate as fully as possible in the proceedings without the necessity of personally appearing in the forum state. The same considerations account for authorizing interstate and international communications between tribunals as per Section 317 [T.C.A. § 36-5-2317 ]. Finally, the discovery procedures of Section 318 [T.C.A. § 36-5-2318 ] are made applicable in a one-state proceeding when another tribunal may assist in that process. Of course, “may assist” is entirely at the discretion of the other tribunal. Note, a foreign tribunal may be completely unfamiliar with discovery procedures as known in the United States. Generally, however, the ordinary substantive and procedural law of the forum state applies in a one-state proceeding. In sum, the parties and the tribunal in a one-state case may utilize those procedures that contribute to economy, efficiency, and fair play. Related to Convention: art. 20. Bases for recognition and enforcement.