MK Family Law

On February 9, 2021, in the case of  Lukic v. Elezovic , the U.S. District Court for the ED of NY ordered the minor child returned forthwith to Montenegro . However, the mother failed to return the minor child.  On February 22, 2021, the trial judge held a phone conference to develop a plan to return the child, and on February 26th, the parents agreed to such a plan.  On March 1st, the Montenegrin Family Court denied the father's request to modify its custody order, thereby leaving the existing custody order in place.  That day, the mother appealed the return order. Therefore, the mother did not return the child as scheduled on March 5th.  The father renewed a contempt motion for the mother's failure to return the child, and the Respondent mother filed a motion to stay the return order.   A district court may issue a stay to the enforcement of a judgment while an appeal is pending, but it is a difficult burden requiring the movant to demonstrate, (1) ...

On October 29, 2020, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3, addressed, in an unpublished opinion, the 2nd appeal noted by Tammy Noergaard to the order returning her eldest daughter, Mia, to Denmark.  In quick summary, Tammy had 2 daughters with Christian Noergaard.  They were born in California, but a few years later, the family re-settled in Denmark.  The parents separated, and they went through years of litigation and appeals in Denmark over the custody of their two children, eventually resulting in Christian securing full custody of both daughters in October 2011, affirmed on appeal in December 2012.  In May 2013, Tammy abducted the oldest child to California.  In January 2014, Christian located Mia, filed a Hague Abduction return petition, and Mia was ordered returned to him.  Tammy appealed (apparently without obtaining a stay of the return order), and succeeded.  Her case was reversed and remanded for a new trial because of...

 On August 19, 2020, the Third District Court of Appeal for the State of Florida, in Vicario v. Blanch , reversed the trial court's order staying a dissolution proceeding in lieu of a dissolution proceeding in Spain.   The parties have a complicated timeline of court filings in both jurisdictions.  The Husband first filed for divorce in Florida.  The parties began litigating, but then he voluntarily dismissed his Florida divorce action and filed a few days later in Spain.  Nearly simultaneous to when the Husband filed in Spain, the Wife filed her divorce action in Florida. Ultimately, the Husband served his Spanish divorce action on the Wife a few months before the Wife served her action on the Husband.  When the Husband dismissed his Florida suit, the case was closed.  With him then serving the Wife first with the newly filed divorce action, the Spanish suit took priority and was first-in-time.  Therefore, the trial court deferred to th...

In the case of Guerra v. Rodas, (Case No. CIV-20-96-SLP) , Plaintiff Mother sought the return of her minor child to Guatemala.  The child was removed from Guatemala in March 2019 by the child’s biological Father.  In May 2019, Plaintiff Mother reported the child’s removal to law enforcement and submitted a formal complaint. She followed this with an application to the Central Authority using the Hague Abduction Convention, and, then, in February 2020, filed the appropriate lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma.   The court hearing itself was continued several times, including for Defendant to find counsel, to appoint a Guardian Ad Litem for the child, and because of COVID-19.  The trial was ultimately heard on June 1, 2020, with the Mother appearing remotely.    The judge found that the Plaintiff Mother met her burden to have the child returned to Guatemala, and then addressed two exceptions argued by the Father. ...

On April 30, 2020, the US District Court for the Western District of Texas Austin Division issued an order in the case of Gallegos v. Garcia Soto returning the parties’ minor child to Mexico.  The court, which took evidence in early March took the further step of staying its return order because of the COVID-19 pandemic.  The key issue before the court was whether the Mother proved by clear and convincing evidence that the spousal abuse she suffered was a grave risk of harm to the minor child.  The court applied the standard from the Gil-Leyva v. Leslie case, 780 F.App’x 580 (10th Cir 2019), which required a finding that the sustained spousal abuse was seriously endangering the child.  In other words, the Court was looking for a nexus between the abusive behavior towards the parent and any grave risk to the child.  The court here, however, found that the Father was not violent or abusive towards the child directly, and that the matter itself was best considere...