Kelly Rutherford suffers child custody loss
Kelly Rutherford has lost the opportunity to have her child custody case heard in the state of California.
The 46-year-old Gossip Girl actress has been in a six-year battle with ex-husband Daniel Giersch over the custody of their two children, son Hermés, eight, and daughter Helena, six.
Although the kids are currently with Kelly for the summer, she had to testify in court earlier this month to ask Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mark Juhas to rule she still has a “significant connection” to California, the state that has been overseeing custody proceedings from American soil.
She’s been living in New York City primarily, thousands of miles away from Los Angeles, and Judge Juhas ruled on Thursday the state of California no longer has jurisdiction over the child custody matter.
"The evidence before this court demonstrates that while [Rutherford] maintains some connections to California, she does not maintain sufficient ties to establish jurisdictional residence,” the magistrate noted in his ruling, according to the New York Daily News.
"The court realises that [Rutherford] may be in a difficult jurisdictional place. The court does not believe that it is obligated to relinquish jurisdiction to Monaco, only that it acknowledges that it no longer has jurisdiction over the children.”
Kelly’s former spouse Daniel has been living in Monaco with their offspring since his visa was revoked in 2012. And in June a judge in Monaco, the principality that holds jurisdiction over the custody matter, ruled Kelly can have the children over the summer.
Kelly is extremely upset that the state of California has forfeited jurisdiction over the custody matter, because now she has to start her legal battle from scratch in New York state.
"We are extremely disappointed. This court set up the current situation whereby my client was forced to live bi-coastally, but now, the court appears to be holding it against her," her lawyer David Glass said.
"Likewise, the court created the situation whereby the children would lose their connections to California, and despite the judgment's language precluding the passage of time from creating new jurisdiction, that is exactly what has happened.”
- Cover Media