Menechem v. Frydman-Menachem, 240 F. Supp. 2d 437 (D. Md. 2003)
- Docket Number
- CIV.A.AW-02-1921
- Published
- Yes
- Decision Date
- 2003-01-14
- Name of Court
- United States District Court, Maryland, Southern Division
- Opinion by
- Willams, Alexander
- Counsel for Petitioner
- Pro se after attorney withdrew July 24, 2002
- Counsel for Respondent
- Mahaffey, Sue Ann
- Counsel for Court
- Requesting State
- Israel
- Requested State
- United States of America
- Procedural History
-
In a custody hearing in Maryland state court granted sole custody rights to Respondent/Mother, with visitation rights for Petitioner/Father. Petitioner/Father filed suit seeking return of child to Israel.
- Summary of Facts
-
Petitioner/Father and Respondent/Mother have two children, and both are citizens of the United States and Israel. In October 1999, the parties moved to the United States from Israel. Petitioner/Father alleges this was purely for business reasons and was not intended as a permanent move. He also presented affidavits to the court from witnesses the couple spoke to about moving back in 2-3 years. Petitioner/Father also alleges that Respondent/Mother had reservations about moving to the United States. Respondent/Mother alleges that the decision to move was also based upon the increase of violence in Israel. Respondent/Mother also alleges that there was no definitive plan to move back to Israel and she did not tell anyone that there were plans to move back. Petitioner/Father claims Respondent/Mother told him she wished to move back to Israel in May 2001. Respondent/Mother claims this was later than 2002, and offered proof to the court of the couple buying a home, and a contract for the 2002-2003 academic year at a private school in Maryland. On April 4, 2002 there was an argument between the couple during which Respondent/Mother threatened to sue Petitioner/Father. Petitioner/Father responded by saying that he would destroy her in court or destroy her at all costs. The police were called to diffuse the situation, and Respondent/Mother states that she called the police out of fear for her safety. On April 5, 2002 Respondent/mother moved with the children to a friends house. On April 9, 2002 Petitioner/father filed for divorce and subsequently moved back to Israel.
- Defenses Raised
-
Hague Article 3a: The childs habitual residence is not the requesting state
- Statutes Considered (ICARA)
- 11601, 11603(a), 11603(e)
- Articles Considered (Hague Convention)
- 1, 2, 3, 11, 19
- Cases Considered
- Bocquet v. Ouzid, 225 F.Supp.2d 1337 2002; Delvoye v. Lee, 224 F.Supp.2d 843 2002; Escaf v. Rodriguez, 200 F.Supp.2d 603 2002; Falls v. Downie, 871 F.Supp. 100 1994; Fawcett v. McRoberts, 168 F.Supp.2d 595 2001; Feder v. Evans-Feder, 63 F.3d 217 1995; Freier v. Freier, 969 F.Supp. 436 1996; In re Rodriguez v. Rodriguez, 33 F.Supp.2d 456 1999; March v. Levine, 136 F.Supp.2d 831 2000; March v. Levine, 249 F.3d 462 2001; McKenzie v. McKenzie, 168 F.Supp.2d 47 2001; Miller v. Miller, 240 F.3d 392 2001; Mozes v. Mozes, 239 F.3d 1067 2001; New York ex rel. Ron v. Levi, 279 A.2d 860 2001; Roszkowski v. Roszkowska, 644 A.2d 1150 1993; Shalit v. Coppe, 182 F.3d 1124 1999; Slagenweit v. Slagenweit, 841 F.Supp. 264 1993; Tsarbopoulos v. Tsarbopoulos, 176 F.Supp.2d 1045 2001; United States Dev. Corp. v. Peoples Fed. Savings & Loan Assoc'n, 873 F.2d 731 1989; Walton v. Walton, 925 F.Supp. 453 1996; Zajaczkowski v. Zajaczkowska, 932 F.Supp. 128 1996
- Judicial Outcome or Order
- Return Order Denied
- Posted
- 2006-09-21
Why this Project?
We are a team of individuals from various professional backgrounds who are dedicated to creating a comprehensive resource that will enable mothers, domestic violence advocates, attorneys and judges to better prepare themselves for Hague Convention cases in the United States' legal system.
