Best interests, Divorce grounds, Parental relocation in one jurisdiction reference.
Research dates are shown separately in each topic.
American Samoa
No enumeration framework; factor structure: n/a.
A.S.C.A. § 42.0210; Tapeni v. Tapeni, 6 A.S.R.3d 81 (High Ct. App. Div. 2002)
No enumeration
n/a
may
n/a
Fit parent rebuttably preferred over a third party (Tapeni)
none
American Samoa
Irreconcilable differences, added in 1996 by Public Law 24-11, or voluntary continuous separation for five years. Older annotations saying irreconcilable differences is unavailable predate the amendment.
Am. Samoa Code Ann. §§42.0202, .0204–.0208, reproduced by the American Samoa Bar Association. P.L.24-11 added irreconcilable differences in 1996. The Secretary’s official index lists approval on June 7, 1996; the official scan includes Governor letters dated March 20, 1996 stating that S.B.24-30 was signed into law that day. The act’s printed approval block is blank; the discrepancy and precise effective date remain unresolved.
Irreconcilable differences, added in 1996 by Public Law 24-11, or voluntary continuous separation for five years. Older annotations saying irreconcilable differences is unavailable predate the amendment.
4: adultery, habitual cruelty or ill usage, desertion for six months or more, sentence to imprisonment for ten years or more or for life
"voluntary continuous separation for a period of 5 years or more," § 42.0202(5)
No fixed filing-to-decree minimum appears in §§ 42.0204–42.0208. Section 42.0206 requires proof and specifies defenses and exceptions, so availability of the ground is not a promise of automatic judgment.
Yes, "a decree of judicial separation" on the same grounds, §§ 42.0202, 42.0204, 42.0208
American Samoa
No relocation-specific rule was found. General custody decisions apply best interests. The code text is from a bar-association reproduction.
None found (A.S.C.A. 42.0210 general)
no relocation-specific rule found
no allocation found
no
no relocation-specific trigger identified
No deemed-consent procedure identified in § 42.0210 or the named custody decisions
General custody standard only, not relocation: Tapeni v. Tapeni, 6 Am. Samoa 3d 81, 84-86 (App. Div. 2002): best interest of the child is the cornerstone. Between natural parents no presumption arises. Fit parents hold a rebuttable presumption against third parties. Tapeni says §42.0210 may be broadly interpreted as supporting a best-interest test (children there were living off-island in Hawaii with relatives, but relocation was not the issue). L.F. v. D.F. (2005) applies Tapeni. Cox v. Paslov, 5 Am. Samoa 3d 150 (Trial Div. July 17, 2001), quotes an older Trial Division tender-years statement (Stevens v. Stevens, 21 A.S.R.2d 76 (1992)). The Tapeni opinion states that natural parents start on equal footing; it does not discuss Stevens or expressly resolve the older tender-years statement. No relocation-specific rule identified.
None found.
None found.
None found.
None found.
None found on relocation. Cox v. Paslov (child present in American Samoa, Montana decree) modified a foreign decree on an emergency and best-interest basis. UCCJEA/PKPA jurisdiction is out of scope. The court there said American Samoa lacked a UCCJA statute.
None stated.
No relocation-specific rule was found. General custody decisions apply best interests. The code text is from a bar-association reproduction.
No allocation found
No separate relocation notice rule found; consent or court permission may still be required
No relocation-specific trigger identified
Explore Steadycase’s case-organization tools and jurisdiction source guides.
Explore Steadycase toolsPublisher’s products · Separate from sponsorship and editorial research
