The court has jurisdiction to appoint a guardian or issue a protective order for an alleged incapacitated individual if:
(A) this State is the alleged incapacitated individual's home state;
(B) on the date the petition is filed, this State is a significant-connection state; and
(1) the alleged incapacitated individual does not have a home state or a court of the alleged incapacitated individual's home state has declined to exercise jurisdiction because this State is a more appropriate forum; or
(2) the alleged incapacitated individual has a home state, a petition for an appointment or order is not pending in a court of that state or another significant-connection state and, before the court makes the appointment or issues the order:
(a) a petition for an appointment or order is not filed in the alleged incapacitated individual's home state;
(b) an objection to the court's jurisdiction is not filed by a person required to be notified of the proceeding; and
(c) the court concludes that it is an appropriate forum pursuant to the factors provided in Section 62-5-710(C);
(C) this State does not have jurisdiction pursuant to either subsections (A) or (B), the alleged incapacitated individual's home state and all significant-connection states have declined to exercise jurisdiction because this State is the more appropriate forum, and jurisdiction in this State is consistent with the constitutions of this State and the United States; or
(D) the requirements for special jurisdiction pursuant to Section 62-5-708 are met.
HISTORY: 2010 Act No. 213, Section 1, eff January 1, 2011; 2017 Act No. 87 (S.415), Section 5.B, eff January 1, 2019.
Effect of Amendment
2017 Act No. 87, Section 5.B, substituted "alleged incapacitated individual" for "respondent" and "alleged incapacitated individual's" for "respondent's" throughout; in (C), substituted "subsections (A) or (B)" for "item (1) or (2)"; and made nonsubstantive changes.