Luka Doncic Challenges California Jurisdiction Over Child Support for Daughters Living in Slovenia
Lakers star Luka Doncic has filed to dismiss his ex-fiancée Anamaria Goltes' California child support petition for their two daughters, arguing she engaged in "forum shopping" by filing in California when both children have lived in Slovenia since May 2025. The case, first reported by TMZ, spotlights a critical question California family courts face with increasing frequency: when does a parent's high income in California justify jurisdiction over children who live abroad?
| Key Facts | Details |
|---|---|
| What happened | Doncic filed to dismiss Goltes' California child support petition, calling it forum shopping |
| When | March 2026 (children relocated to Slovenia in May 2025) |
| Who is affected | Doncic, Goltes, and their two minor daughters |
| Key legal issue | Whether California has jurisdiction when children reside in Slovenia |
| Relevant California law | Cal. Fam. Code § 3421 (UCCJEA home state jurisdiction) |
| Competing proceeding | Doncic filed his own custody petition in Slovenian courts |
California Requires "Home State" Status Before It Can Hear Custody Cases
California adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) under Cal. Fam. Code §§ 3400-3465, and the statute is unambiguous on the threshold question: a court must establish that it is the child's "home state" before exercising jurisdiction over custody or support. Under Cal. Fam. Code § 3421(a)(1), the home state is the state where the child lived with a parent for at least 6 consecutive months immediately before the proceeding was filed.
Doncic's legal team appears to have a straightforward argument here. If both daughters have resided in Slovenia since May 2025 — roughly 10 months before Goltes filed in California — California likely cannot claim home-state jurisdiction. The children would need to have lived in California for 6 continuous months before the filing date for the court to have automatic jurisdiction under the UCCJEA.
There is a wrinkle, though. California courts can still exercise jurisdiction under Cal. Fam. Code § 3421(a)(2) if no other state qualifies as the home state and the child has "significant connection" to California, with "substantial evidence" available in the state concerning the child's welfare. Goltes could argue that Doncic's Lakers salary (reported at $43.2 million for the 2025-26 season), his California residence, and his financial records all constitute substantial evidence located in California.
The International Dimension Changes the Analysis Significantly
This case goes beyond a typical interstate custody dispute. When children reside in a foreign country, California courts must also consider international treaties and comity principles. The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (1980) generally requires that custody disputes be resolved in the country of the child's habitual residence. Both the United States and Slovenia are signatories to the Hague Convention, which has been in force in Slovenia since 1994.
Under Cal. Fam. Code § 3405(a), California courts must treat a foreign country as if it were a U.S. state for purposes of applying the UCCJEA, provided that country's custody law is consistent with the Hague Convention. Slovenia, as an EU member state, also falls under the Brussels IIa Regulation (now Brussels IIb, effective August 2022), which establishes its own jurisdictional rules prioritizing the child's habitual residence.
Doncic filing a competing custody petition in Slovenia adds another layer. Under Cal. Fam. Code § 3426, if a California court learns that a custody proceeding has been commenced in another jurisdiction that could claim home-state status, the California court must communicate with the foreign court to resolve the jurisdictional conflict. In practice, simultaneous filings in two countries that are both Hague signatories typically result in deference to the country where the children physically reside.
What "Forum Shopping" Actually Means in Family Law
Doncic's accusation of forum shopping carries legal weight beyond rhetoric. Forum shopping in family law refers to a parent deliberately filing in a jurisdiction whose laws would produce a more favorable financial outcome. California's child support guidelines under Cal. Fam. Code § 4055 use an income-shares model that factors in both parents' net disposable incomes and the percentage of time each parent has physical custody.
For a parent earning $43.2 million annually, California's guideline formula can produce child support obligations significantly higher than what courts in many European countries would order. Slovenian family law caps child support based on the child's reasonable needs and the standard of living the child would have enjoyed had the family remained intact — a potentially lower figure than California's income-driven formula.
California courts have recognized forum shopping concerns in international cases before. In the 2005 case Marriage of Fernandez-Abin & Sanchez (191 Cal.App.4th 1015), the court emphasized that jurisdiction must be based on the child's connections to the state, not a parent's desire to access favorable support calculations. A parent's high income alone does not create jurisdiction where the children have no ongoing residential ties.
Practical Takeaways for California Parents in International Custody Disputes
-
File in the children's home state or country first. Under Cal. Fam. Code § 3421, the jurisdiction where children have lived for 6 or more consecutive months has priority. Doncic filing in Slovenia before or around the same time as Goltes' California petition strengthens his jurisdictional argument considerably.
-
Understand that California income does not automatically create California jurisdiction. Earning money in California — even $43.2 million per year — does not give California courts authority over children who live abroad. Jurisdiction follows the children, not the paycheck.
-
Document the children's habitual residence carefully. Courts will examine school enrollment records, medical provider histories, social ties, and the duration of residence when determining habitual residence. Parents who relocated children internationally should maintain thorough documentation of the move's circumstances and permanence.
-
Seek legal counsel experienced in Hague Convention cases immediately. International custody jurisdiction disputes involve overlapping federal treaty obligations, state UCCJEA rules, and foreign law. The 2-3 week window after an initial filing is critical for responding with jurisdictional challenges.
-
Do not assume California's generous support guidelines will apply. Even if a California court initially accepts a filing, the opposing party can challenge jurisdiction at any stage before a final order. Courts that later determine they lack jurisdiction must dismiss the case under Cal. Fam. Code § 3427, potentially wasting months of litigation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a parent file for child support in California if the children live in another country?
Generally, no. Under Cal. Fam. Code § 3421, California must be the child's "home state" (6+ months of consecutive residence) to exercise custody and support jurisdiction. When children reside abroad in a Hague Convention signatory country like Slovenia, California courts typically defer to the foreign jurisdiction where the children physically live.
What is forum shopping in child support cases?
Forum shopping occurs when a parent files in a jurisdiction chosen specifically for its favorable support calculations rather than where the children actually live. California's income-based formula under Cal. Fam. Code § 4055 can produce higher support orders than many foreign jurisdictions, making it an attractive target for parents whose ex-partners earn high incomes in the state.
How does the Hague Convention affect California custody jurisdiction?
The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction (ratified by 103 countries including the US and Slovenia) establishes that custody disputes should be resolved in the country of the child's habitual residence. California courts must treat Hague-signatory countries as equivalent to US states under Cal. Fam. Code § 3405(a), meaning foreign home-state claims receive the same priority as domestic ones.
Does earning a high salary in California give the state jurisdiction over child support?
No. A parent's income in California does not establish jurisdiction over children who live elsewhere. Under the UCCJEA (Cal. Fam. Code §§ 3400-3465), jurisdiction is determined by the children's residential connections to the state — not the parents' financial ties. Courts have consistently held that income alone cannot substitute for the 6-month home-state residency requirement.
What happens when custody cases are filed in two different countries simultaneously?
Under Cal. Fam. Code § 3426, California courts must communicate with the competing foreign court to resolve the jurisdictional conflict. In practice, when both countries are Hague Convention signatories, priority typically goes to the country where the children have their habitual residence. The court that lacks jurisdiction must stay or dismiss its proceeding.
If you are navigating an international custody or child support dispute involving California, our directory of California family law attorneys can help you find experienced counsel in your county.
This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.