Skip to main content
CourtGPT logoCourtGPT
Directory
Law
For Attorneys
Blog
AppointmentsSign InSign Up
§ 26-5b-310 — South Dakota Law | CourtGPT
  1. Home/
  2. Laws/
  3. South Dakota/
  4. Title 26 - Minors/
  5. Chapter 05b - Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act/
  6. § 26-5b-310
South Dakota Legal Code

§ 26-5b-310

Ask AI about this
26-5B-310. Hearing and order.(a) Unless the court issues a temporary emergency order pursuant to §26-5B-204, upon a finding that a petitioner is entitled to immediate physical custody of the child, the court shall order that the petitioner may take immediate physical custody of the child unless the respondent establishes that:(1)The child-custody determination has not been registered and confirmed under §26-5B-305 and that:(A)The issuing court did not have jurisdiction under Article 2;(B)The child-custody determination for which enforcement is sought has been vacated, stayed, or modified by a court of a state having jurisdiction to do so under Article 2; or(C)The respondent was entitled to notice, but notice was not given in accordance with the standards of §26-5B-108, in the proceedings before the court that issued the order for which enforcement is sought; or(2)The child-custody determination for which enforcement is sought was registered and confirmed under §26-5B-305 but has been vacated, stayed, or modified by a court of a state having jurisdiction to do so under Article 2.(b) The court shall award the fees, costs, and expenses authorized under §26-5B-312 and may grant

been vacated, stayed, or modified by a court of a state having jurisdiction to do so under Article 2.(b) The court shall award the fees, costs, and expenses authorized under §26-5B-312 and may grant additional relief, including a request for the assistance of law enforcement officers, and set a further hearing to determine whether additional relief is appropriate.(c) If a party called to testify refuses to answer on the ground that the testimony may be self-incriminating, the court may draw an adverse inference from the refusal.(d) A privilege against disclosure of communications between spouses and a defense of immunity based on the relationship of husband and wife or parent and child may not be invoked in a proceeding under this article. Source: SL 2005, ch 137, §32.