Columnist Sandy Thompson: Jurisdiction issue in custody dispute

Sandy Thompson

Saturday, Dec. 2, 2000 | 10:18 a.m.

Sandy Thompson is vice president/associate editor of the Las Vegas Sun. She can be reached at 259-4025 or e-mail at thompson@lasvegassun.com

DID CLARK County Family Court have jurisdiction in the divorce and custody case of a couple who never resided in Nevada?

The answer lies with the Nevada Supreme Court.

Cisile Vaile, a native of Norway, and Scotlund Vaile were married in Salt Lake City in 1990 and later had two daughters. They lived in Ohio and Virginia before moving to London. There, in 1998, they decided to end the marriage.

Cisile says Scotlund "shopped around" for a quick divorce, and chose Las Vegas. In anticipation of filing for divorce here, Scotlund had a credit card bill statement mailed to a Las Vegas address in May 1998.

Two months later Scotlund signed his complaint for divorce in Las Vegas. He had a 23-page divorce agreement, signed by Cisile, which detailed custody and said there were "no marital assets" to be divided. Cisile said she signed the document under duress.

Family Court Judge Dianne Steel granted the uncontested divorce. Scotlund returned to London. Cisile moved with the girls to Norway.

Although Cisile says she took the girls to London to visit their father, the couple could not agree on a permanent custody arrangement. They tried mediating the issue in Norway, but were unsuccessful.

Last February, Scotlund, who by then apparently had moved to Texas, successfully petitioned Family Court for custody of the girls, 5 and 9. Three months later, Scotlund met Cisile and the girls at a hotel in Norway. At some point, he slipped the girls out of the room and disappeared. Scotlund left a letter at the hotel front desk that included the Family Court custody order. Cisile, Norway police and Norwegian television treated it as a kidnapping.

Cisile later learned Scotlund and the girls were in Texas. In early October she came to Las Vegas to ask Family Court to overturn the divorce because it was "fraudulently obtained" and to return the girls to Cisile under the Hague Convention. That's an international agreement among some nations to honor each others' custody laws.

Steel took emergency jurisdiction of the case; Scotlund and the girls came to Las Vegas.

During a hearing on Cisile's motion, Steel didn't buy Cisile's claims that she was coerced into signing the divorce and custody agreement, and said it was Cisile, not Scotlund, who had kidnapped the girls (in violation of Steel's original order).

In late October, Steel upheld the custody order and denied Cisile's motion. Marshal Willick, Cisile's attorney, then filed two writs with the Nevada Supreme Court. Willick explains the difference between an appeal and a writ: An appeal challenges a ruling on the basis that it's erroneous. A writ alleges the court "did something it didn't have the power to do or didn't do something it was required to do."

Apparently believing the case has merit, the Supreme Court last week asked Scotlund for a response to the writs. His attorney was unavailable for comment.

Willick contends Family Court had no jurisdiction in the Vaile divorce case because Scotlund had not been a true resident of Clark County. (Steel had ruled that the mailing of a credit card statement showed his intent to move here. That was enough to establish residency because he could not be physically present here.)

Willick also says Steel should have considered the Hague Convention, which states that international custody disputes should be decided in the place of "habitual residence" of the children. According to her ruling, Steel made no Hague Convention determination, but if she had, she would have found the habitual residence of the Vaile girls to be Nevada.

That puzzled Cisile, since the girls never lived in Nevada.

Today Cisile is back in Norway. The girls are with Scotlund in Texas.

Willick says Cisile was thwarted in her attempts to see the girls in Texas. A visitation schedule was drawn up, but it's unrealistic since it would require travel from Norway to the United States every other weekend.

More than an ocean divides the Vailes. In the end, this case likely will be decided on "technicalities" rather than the sometimes-hard-to-define premise of "the best interest of the child."