Kyle Edward Dangler, Lisa Ann Dangler v. Edward Eugene Dangler, father, Patricia G. Dangler, and Edward C. Dangler, Grandparents

This case involves the application and interpretation of certain provisions of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA) as enacted by the states of Missouri and Tennessee, T.C.A. §§ 36-6-201 to 36-6-225 (1991), as well as the Federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA). 28 U.S.C.A. § 1738A (1994). The courts of this state first became involved with this tragic set of complicated circumstances when Lisa Ann Dangler (“petitioner”), a resident of Missouri, filed suit in the Circuit Court of Maury County, Tennessee (“Tennessee trial court”) seeking to have that court enroll a foreign judgment from the state of Missouri and to enforce a writ of habeas corpus issued by the Circuit Court of Barry County, Missouri (“Missouri trial court”), which had as part of a divorce proceeding in that court in 1983 awarded petitioner custody of the parties’ minor child. Named as 1Although the child’s father was named a respondent, the only truly active respondents in this case are the paternal grandparents of the child. 2 respondents are Eugene Edward Dangler (?father”) and the child’s paternal grandparents, Patricia G. Dangler and Edward C. Dangler (by name or ?respondents”).1 The court below held that it had jurisdiction of this case pursuant to T.C.A. § 36-6-201 and proceeded to award custody to the paternal grandparents, giving petitioner visitation rights. On appeal, petitioner has presented three issues for our consideration (1) whether the trial court erred in engaging in a “best interest of the child evaluation” in reaching a decision as to custody, absent a showing of substantial harm to the child; (2) whether the trial court erred in holding that the order of habeas corpus from the Missouri court was unenforceable in this state; and (3) whether petitioner is entitled to attorney’s fees in connection with this litigation.