I divorced in California 13 years ago, so my experience in kind of old. Here's a website which might help you (I hope):
http://www.caldivorceguide.com/cgi-win/cgi_si.exe?div|1+16|At the time I divorced, it didn't matter where you married, it mattered where you were living WHEN you divorced. In my case, while I lived in California when I divorced, I had plans to move out of state. For that reason, my attorney put a provision that California would retain jurisdiction. It becomes kind of twisted, but, I hope I can explain this, in a way that will help.
My attorney wanted to make sure I got the "best" of all worlds. x was a serial cheater, so the idea was for me to be protected regardless of where I (and the children, since I had custody) resided. As I understand it, California (at the time) was a bit more generous with financial settlement and issues etc. However, my attorney set it up so that if I moved some place different AFTER the divorce and resided there for a year or more, I would be able to look at the different benefits of both states and decide which state was the most beneficial in regards to the change I wanted to make. IOW, if living in NV was more beneficial on a certain issue, I could choose to petition the courts in NV to hear my case, which in all likelihood, they would be willing to do. If, however, I could get a better deal in California, I was free to petition the courts there, despite the fact that I no longer resided there.
It is complicated enough, that you really need a good lawyer.
Good luck to you,
BTM
