You are here
1980 Hague Convention on International Child Abduction: A Resource for Judges: Case Commentaries
U.S. Supreme Court Cases
Abbott v. Abbott, 560 U.S. 1 (2010)
Rights of Custody | Convention Interpretation
Ne exeat clauses combined with access or visitation rights. Sources of interpretation for the 1980 Convention.
Chafin v. Chafin, 133 S. Ct. 1017 (2013)
Appeal from order of return not rendered moot even though child has been physically returned to habitual residence.
Lozano v. Montoya Alvarez, 134 S. Ct. 1224 (2014)
Delay | Settlement
The doctrine of equitable estoppel does not interrupt the running of the one-year period set forth in Article 12. Whether concealment prevent child from acquiring the degree of stable attachments needed to become settled in new environment.
Appellate Court Cases
Danaipour v. McLarey (Danaipour I), 286 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2002), and Danaipour v. McLarey (Danaipour II), 386 F.3d 289 (1st Cir. 2004)
Grave Risk | Sexual Abuse of Child
Cannot defer to a foreign court question of whether abuse of child has occurred. Question of whether grave risk exists is one for U.S. courts to determine, not courts of child’s habitual residence.
Mauvais v. Herisse, 772 F.3d 6 (1st Cir. 2014)
Habitual Residence |Acclimatization | Grave Risk
Presence of children in Canada for three-and-a-half-year period evidenced parents’ joint intent to allow habitual residence to be established. A change in place coupled with an appreciable period of time may influence habitual residence analysis.
Mendez v. May, 778 F.3d 337 (1st Cir. 2015) (Petition for Certiorari docketed on June 17, 2015)
Shared intent of parents. Change of habitual residence may occur without physical relocation of the child.
Nicolson v. Pappalardo, 605 F.3d 100 (1st Cir. 2010)
Consent and Acquiescence
Temporary custody orders entered by stipulation may be insufficient to demonstrate consent or acquiescence to relocation of child.
Blondin v. Dubois (Blondin I), 189 F.3d 240 (2d Cir. 1999), and Blondin v. Dubois (Blondin II), 238 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2001)
Grave Risk | Domestic Violence
Court has duty to explore full range of options before denying return of child.
Souratgar v. Lee, 720 F.3d 96 (2d Cir. 2013)
Article 20 | Syariah Law
Domestic violence may not constitute “grave risk” defense if violence is not directed toward child.
Karkkainen v. Kovalchuk, 445 F.3d 280 (3d Cir. 2006)
Degree to which child’s experiences and contacts occurred before date of wrongful retention or removal. Degree of acclimatization related to age and maturity of child.
Bader v. Kramer (Bader I), 445 F.3d 346 (4th Cir. 2006), and Bader v. Kramer (Bader II), 484 F.3d 666 (4th Cir. 2007)
Rights of Custody
Parent retains custody rights where divorce court has not ruled otherwise and there is no clear evidence of abandonment.
Smedley v. Smedley, 772 F.3d 184 (4th Cir. 2014)
Decision of foreign court is entitled to comity where the foreign decision meets a minimum standard of reasonableness and Hague Convention is not clearly misinterpreted.
Rodriguez v. Yanez, 817 F.3d 466 (5th Cir. 2016)
Exercise of Custody Rights | Child’s Objection to Return
Exercise of custody rights exists where parent maintains some sort of relationship with child. Objection of child to return may not be sustained by mere preference, as opposed to actual objection, but child’s preference to remain with a parent may be relevant to sustain an objection to return.
Sanchez v. R.G.L., 761 F.3d 495 (5th Cir. 2014)
Unaccompanied Alien Children | Standing to Appeal
Appointment of guardian ad litem. Necessary parties. Effect of grant of asylum.
Friedrich v. Friedrich (Friedrich I), 983 F.2 1396 (6th Cir. 1993), and Friedrich v. Friedrich (Friedrich II), 78 F.3d 1060 (6th Cir. 1996)
Habitual Residence | Rights of Custody | Grave Risk | Consent and Acquiescence
Definition of habitual residence. Exercise of custody rights.
Van De Sande v. Van De Sande, 431 F.3d 567 (7th Cir. 2005)
Grave Risk | Domestic Violence
Considering whether laws of habitual residence, or extent to which they are enforced, ameliorate risk of harm to children. Discussion of undertakings to protect children upon return.
Redmond v. Redmond, 724 F.3d 729 (7th Cir. 2013)
Custody Orders | Habitual Residence
Custody orders issued after removal of child. Test for determining habitual residence, and analysis of circuit courts’ majority and minority views.
Barzilay v. Barzilay (Barzilay I), 536 F.3d 844 (8th Cir. 2008), and Barzilay v. Barzilay (Barzilay II), 600 F.3d 912 (8th Cir. 2010)
Habitual Residence | Younger Abstention
Habitual residence may not be established by written agreement of parents alone. Younger abstention not applicable where litigant has “opportunity” to litigate Hague issues but does not do so.
Cuellar v. Joyce (Cuellar I), 596 F.3d 505 (9th Cir. 2010), and Cuellar v. Joyce (Cuellar II), 603 F.3d 1142 (9th Cir. 2010)
Grave Risk | Attorneys’ Fees
“Grave risk” defense not triggered by showing of disparity in living conditions between habitual residence and United States. Pro bono counsel entitled to fees for representing successful petitioner.
E.R.S.C. v. Carlwig (In re A.L.C.), 607 F. App'x 658 (9th Cir. 2015)
Whether infants can acquire habitual residence.
In re A.L.C., 607 Fed. App’x 658 (9th Cir. 2015)
Habitual Residence | Re-Return Orders Following Reversal of Lower Court Order on Appeal
Whether an infant child may be habitual resident of a country where he or she never lived. Orders for re-return of a child after lower court order is reversed on appeal.
Margain v. Ruiz-Bours, 592 F. App’x 619 (9th Cir. 2015) (unpublished opinion)
Acclimatization and Settlement | Equitable Tolling
Evidence supporting acclimatization and settlement, equitable tolling.
Mozes v. Mozes, 239 F.3d 1067 (9th Cir. 2001)
Shared intent of parents to abandon former habitual residence. Change in geographic location of child. Acclimatization.
West v. Dobrev, 735 F.3d 921 (10th Cir. 2013)
The 1980 Convention does not require an evidentiary hearing in every case.
Gomez v. Fuenmayor, 812 F.3d 1005 (11th Cir. 2016)
Grave Risk | Domestic Violence
Even though a child is not directly harmed by violent conduct against a parent and his or her family, child may be subjected to grave risk of physical and/or psychological harm as a result of that violence.
Lops v. Lops, 140 F.3d 927 (11th Cir. 1998)
Whether child who has been actively concealed may be deemed “settled” in new environment.
District Court Cases
Marquez v. Castillo, 72 F. Supp. 3d 1280 (M.D. Fla. 2014)
Order issued restraining removal of child from court’s jurisdiction, setting date for evidentiary hearing, and authorizing seizure of any and all travel documents for abducting parent and child, to prevent their use for the purpose of obtaining duplicate passports.