MK Family Law

On November 19, 2020, the US District Court for the M.D. of Georgia issued its opinion, denying Mr. Romero's request to return his two children to Chile .  In December 2017, Mr. Romero brought the parties' 2 children to Florida to see his mother, with the intention of remaining until March 2018.  Ms. Bahamonde alleged, however, that in January 2018, Mr. Romero advised her that he and the children would not be returning.  In February 2018, she moved to Florida, first living with Mr. Romero's mother, and then moving out on her own.  Eventually, both children began residing with Ms. Bahamonde.  The parties had an acrimonious relationship both in Chile and in Florida.  Ms. Bahamonde had filed several requests for protective orders, and a hearing was scheduled for September 20, 2018, then re-scheduled to December 13, 2018.  She ultimately dismissed the case, however, learning that Mr. Romero had returned, with both children's passports, to Chile on Septembe...

The Washington Foreign Law Society was founded in 1952 and promotes knowledge and understanding of international legal matters, comparative law issues, and foreign law.  The organization, centered in the robust legal community of Washington, D.C., produces fantastic programs.   On November 17, 2020, I was honored to be joined by Jonathan Lounsberry and Richard Min to discuss the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court cast of Monasky v. Taglieri and the definition of habitual residence in Hague Child Abduction Convention proceedings.   Check out the recording of the program here . 

The recent 1980 Hague Abduction case of De Carvalho v. Carvalho Pereira focused on two key issues: the children's habitual residence and whether the children were now settled in the United States.  The District Court of Appeal of Florida affirmed the trial court's order to return both children to Brazil.   The family, in this case, moved to Florida in January 2016 for the Father's short-term medical fellowship in a U.S. hospital, and for the Mother to give birth to the parties' second child on U.S. soil.  A few months later, and after the 2nd child's birth, the Father's fellowship fell through, so he returned to Brazil to prepare the family home for everyone's return.  He sent return plane tickets to his family, but the Mother decided (on or about April 5, 2016) she was remaining in the United States, with the children, and wished to divorce.   The trial court concluded that neither parent intended to permanently relocate the family to the United Stat...

The 10th Circuit affirmed the Pope v. Lunday decision on November 20, 2020.  Ms. Lunday, pregnant with twins, returned to her home of Oklahoma from Brazil.  The twins were born in Oklahoma, and shortly after, Mr. Pope filed suit under the 1980 Hague Abduction Convention, seeking the twins' return to Brazil.  The children had never been to Brazil, except in utero .  The trial court's focus was on pinpointing the twins' habitual residence.  It concluded it was the United States, and therefore denied Mr. Pope's return request on the papers. The 10th Circuit had the benefit of the Monasky opinion when it reached its decision in November, which not only discussed the habitual residence of newborns, but established the standard of review as "clear error."  Mr. Pope argued that the parents shared an intent to make Brazil the home of their twins, with Ms. Lunday taking steps towards licensure for her profession in Brazil, and the couple registering their partners...