MK Family Law

In Avendano v. Balza , the First Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court's refusal to return G, a minor child, to Venezuela on the basis that G was mature, and objected to the return.  The Petitioner Mother appeals the court's finding on two points. Point one : Petitioner argues the court wrongly concluded the child was mature The trial judge did not commit clear error when concluding that the child was mature.  The trial judge had examined a variety of witnesses who had observed the minor child's demeanor, heard testimony from the child's Guardian Ad Litem , and had even interviewed the minor child personally in the GAL's office before concluding that the child's desires were "very clear, consistent, and rational" and that he not only stated a preference for the United States, but clearly objected to being returned to Venezuela.  The Court rejected the Petitioner's argument that the Court should have examined the child's maturity at the time ...

On January 8, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia denied a return petition brought under the Hague Abduction Convention in the case of Alfonso VH v. Christina AZ  on the basis that the minor child is now settled in the United States. The court found that the Petitioner Father established a prima facie case of wrongful retention after the child's Respondent Mother refused to return their child to Honduras as scheduled on April 23, 2019 (at the end of a planned 2-week trip).  The Respondent argued three exceptions to the child's return: (1) the child was now "well" settled, (2) the child's "wishes," and (3) a grave risk.  The minor child was appointed a Guardian Ad Litem , who filed a report with the court, which included statements made by the child, and which both parents agreed the court could accept in lieu of the child's testimony.  The Petitioner did not file his return petition with the court in Virginia until app...