By: E.A. Putman
Why I Like Jurisdiction
I think about jurisdiction more than most people. It’s the part of family law where emotion fades (mostly) and procedure takes over. When jurisdiction is at issue, the stakes are high and the rules are precise — and that challenge is what I genuinely enjoy.
In more than a decade of practice, I’ve handled UCCJEA disputes between Texas and at least eleven other states. Only once did that require getting on a plane — for court in New Orleans. I hold a JD and a degree in Comparative Law from LSU Law. Louisiana’s civil code wasn’t intimidating. It sharpened my analysis of systems that work differently from the common-law framework most states follow.
Even outside the courtroom, jurisdiction follows me — like when I think about a Super Bowl I didn’t watch, the Patriots losing, reports that Cardi B and Stefon Diggs may have separated, and what any of that could possibly have to do with Massachusetts and family law.
When Pop Culture Triggers Procedure
Then the lawyer brain kicks in.
Consider a three-month-old child born to a professional football player based in Massachusetts and a celebrity mother who reportedly resides in the New York/New Jersey tri-state area. How would a custody case be handled between New York or New Jersey and Massachusetts, a state that has not adopted the UCCJEA?
What I still can’t quite explain is Massachusetts. It was one of the original thirteen colonies and one of the first states to abolish slavery. Yet, it is still outside the statutory framework most of the country uses to decide where custody cases belong.
The Massachusetts Jurisdiction Matchup
Cardi B and Stefon Diggs reportedly began a relationship last year and welcomed a child in November 2025. She reportedly lives in the New York/New Jersey tri-state area. He reportedly lives in Maryland, while also spending part of the football season working in Foxborough, Massachusetts.
If a custody case were filed in Massachusetts, the threshold question would be jurisdiction: does Massachusetts even have the authority to decide anything?
Is Massachusetts the child’s “home state”?
Or would another state have the stronger claim to decide custody?
Massachusetts has not adopted the UCCJEA not because it disagrees with its core principles, but because the Commonwealth already had its own custody jurisdiction statute — the Massachusetts Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (MCCJA) — in place before the UCCJEA became the national standard. Rather than replacing that framework with the uniform act, Massachusetts has continued to rely on and update its existing statute.
When Massachusetts is involved, the symmetry that exists between UCCJEA states can break down. In straightforward cases, the result is often the same: the child’s home state controls. But in closer cases — newborns, recent relocations, or families spread across state lines — the lack of uniform statutory language can mean more hearings, more delay, and more complications.
That’s why, when Massachusetts is paired with a UCCJEA state like New York or New Jersey, jurisdiction becomes a full-blown pregame battle rather than a quick procedural kickoff.
And that brings us to the core rule courts use to answer those questions.
Away Game Rules
When the child is an infant, jurisdiction becomes refreshingly straightforward. There’s no home-field advantage and no benefit to filing first. For a baby under six months old, the analysis turns on one fact: where the child has lived since birth.
Not where a parent works — Foxborough, Massachusetts.
Not where the celebrity sightings are — on the sidelines at Gillette Stadium.
Just where the child actually lives.
Even in Massachusetts, the focus is the same. Courts are wary of forum shopping and look to the state with the strongest, most meaningful connection to the child. For a three-month-old, that connection is almost always the place the child has called home from day one.
Before Custody, Jurisdiction
Massachusetts may have watched its team come up short on the biggest stage. However, custody jurisdiction isn’t decided by headlines. It isn’t determined by proximity to the spotlight. It’s decided by law.
At its core, custody law reduces to two questions:
Where does the child actually live?
And which court has the authority to decide what happens next?
Fame doesn’t answer those questions. Geography does.
Don’t Guess on Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction mistakes are costly — and often irreversible. When more than one state is involved, getting the forum right at the outset can shape everything that follows.
Eronn Putman is a longtime family law litigator. She is a jurisdiction-focused attorney. She enjoys untangling complex interstate custody issues before they become bigger problems.
If jurisdiction is in play, don’t guess.
Call 281-501-9033 or text 832-598-6297 to talk it through.
PUTMANIAC BLOG 