avoidance of jurisdictional conflicts. In this case, the Florida court’s award of custody to the father is not entitled to recognition under either the UCCJA or the PKPA. Judgment reversed. Smith, J., concurs. Pope, P. J., concurs specially. 1 See OCGA § 19-9-43 (a); Youmans v. Youmans, 247 Ga. 529, 532 (276 SE2d 837) (1981). 2 OCGA § 19-9-43 (a) (l)-(4). 3 OCGA § 19-9-42 (5). 4 OCGA § 19-9-43 (a) (1). 5 OCGA § 19-9-43 (a) (2). 6 OCGA § 19-9-43 (a) (3). 7 OCGA § 19-9-43 (a) (4). 8 Although jurisdiction of a custody dispute under the UCCJA is referred to as “subject matter” jurisdiction, Wilson v. Gouse, 263 Ga. 887 (441 SE2d 57) (1994), it is not subject matter jurisdiction in the traditional sense of that term. See Craighead v. Davis, 162 Ga. App. 145, 146 (1) (290 SE2d 358) (1982) (<HOLDING>). The UCCJA contains no express requirements
holding that the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction over a commonlaw wrongful discharge claim holding that personal jurisdiction is not required to make an outofstate parent a party to custody action where the state court has subject matter jurisdiction under the uniform child custody jurisdiction act holding that a georgia superior court had subject matter jurisdiction in a case governed by the uccja because the georgia constitution grants superior courts jurisdiction over interstate child custody disputes holding that the superior court had no jurisdiction over the division of marital property when the district court had properly invoked jurisdiction over the property recognizing that generally disputes between purchasers of a debtors assets and third parties are not within the bankruptcy courts jurisdiction but recognizing that disputes concerning the sale order itself may be sufficient for subject matter jurisdiction