version of the UCCJA, Russian custody decree may only be recognized and enforced where the decree was issued in connection with proceedings that comported with ideals of due process of law); Stock v. Stock, 677 So.2d 1341, 1345, 1348 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1996) (stating that the “goals of the UCCJA apply even when the other jurisdiction is a foreign nation” and remanding custody case for further proceedings to determine “whether Switzerland properly exercised jurisdiction in conformity with the policies of the UCCJA”); Ruppen v. Ruppen, 614 N.E.2d 577, 581-82 (Ind.Ct.App.1993) (determining that Italy was a “state” within the meaning of Indiana version of UCCJA and declining jurisdiction because Italy was children’s “home state”); McFaull v. McFaull, 560 So.2d 1013, 1014 (La.Ct.App.1990) (<HOLDING>); Klont v. Klont, 130 Mich.App. 138, 342 N.W.2d
holding that the term state in new jersey version of uccja includes foreign countries thereby rendering jurisdictional portions of act applicable to international custody disputes recognizing that the essential requisites of procedural due process are notice and meaningful opportunity to be heard holding that the general policies of the uccja adopted by louisiana extend to the international area and recognition and enforcement of custody decrees are extended to other countries if there has been reasonable notice and the opportunity to be heard holding that the uccja applied to a california child custody order granting temporary custody of two children to their father holding that procedural due process requires adequate notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard