You are here

International Law & Litigation

Displaying 51 - 60 of 103
Contains
Contains
Is greater than
March 13, 2016

What are the differences between access rights and custody rights?

A person with only access rights (the equivalent of “visitation rights”) cannot maintain a petition for the return of a child. Only parents with rights of custody to the child may petition for the return of an abducted child.1

March 9, 2016

Do the doctrines of abstention and removal apply to Hague Convention cases?

The International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA), 22 U.S.C. §§ 9001 et seq., provides for original concurrent jurisdiction in both federal and state courts.1 Dual jurisdiction allows issues to be raised about the interface between federal and state courts, including abstention and removal.

Three types of abstention have been addressed in the cases:

Downloadable files:
March 5, 2016
James D. Garbolino

Lozano v. Montoya Alvarez, 134 S. Ct. 1224 (2014)

Equitable Tolling | Return Despite Article 12 Defense | Delay | Settlement

Downloadable file:
March 5, 2016
James D. Garbolino

Van De Sande v. Van De Sande, 431 F.3d 567 (7th Cir. 2005)

Grave Risk | Domestic Violence

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 2 pages
March 5, 2016
James D. Garbolino

Souratgar v. Lee, 720 F.3d 96 (2d Cir. 2013)

Article 20 | Domestic Violence | Degree of Violence | Grave Risk to Child | Syariah Law

This case deals in part with the claim that the prospect of having to litigate custody in Syariah courts violates the provisions of Article 20, prohibiting the return of children if the return would be contrary to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. There is also a substantial discus­sion as to what constitutes domestic violence sufficient to war­rant a refusal to return a child.

March 5, 2016
James D. Garbolino

Sanchez v. R.G.L., 761 F.3d 495 (5th Cir. 2014)

Unaccompanied Alien Children | Standing to Appeal

Facts

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 3 pages
March 5, 2016
James D. Garbolino

West v. Dobrev, 735 F.3d 921 (10th Cir. 2013)

Summary Judgment | Sua Sponte Orders

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 2 pages
March 4, 2016
James D. Garbolino

Gomez v. Fuenmayor, 812 F.3d 1005 (11th Cir. 2016)

Grave Risk | Domestic Vio­lence

Even though the child was not directly harmed by violent conduct against a parent and his or her family, the child may be subjected to grave risk of physical and/or psychological harm as a result of that violence.

Facts

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 2 pages
March 1, 2016

Assistance to Other Nations - IJR brochure

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 2 pages
February 25, 2016
James D. Garbolino

This is a “mirror image” order that is designed to be entered in both the U.S. court making the order and in the courts of the child’s habitual residence. This order directs that it be sent to the U.S. Central Authority for transmission to the Central Authority of the child’s habitual residence, and thereupon entered in the appropriate court of the habitual residence.  Such a procedure is likely to consume a lot of time.  Typically, counsel for the parties are directed to obtain the issuance of the mirror order from the foreign court.

Downloadable files:

Pages

Subscribe to International Law & Litigation