About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 Commentary: Appellate Court Cases, Smith v. Smith, 976 F.3d 558 (5th Cir. 2020) 1 (2020)

handle is hein.congcourts/fjsmsm0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Commentary: Appellate Court Cases Smith v. Smith, 976 F.3d 558 (5th Cir. 2020) Habitual Residence I Parental Intent I Other Fifth Circuit CasesPrcdn Precedent Soto v. Contreras, 880 F.3d 706 (5th Cir. 2018) In a pre-Monasky' case, the district court denied a father's petition for the return of his children to Ar- Madrigal v. T zr gentina and found that the children's habitual resi- dence was the United States. Since the district Delgado v. Osuna, court determined and considered all of the relevant 837 F.3d 571 (5th Cir. 2016) facts, its decision satisfied Monasky's totality-of- circumstances test for determining habitual resi- Hernandez v. Pena, dne 820 F.3d 782 (5th Cir. 2016) dence. Rodriguez v. Yanez, Holding 817 F.3d 466 (5th Cir. 2016) Berezowskyv. Ojeda (Berezowsky II), In determining habitual residence, the district court 652 F. App'x 249 (5th Cir. 2016) considered all of the relevant facts. The Fifth Cir- cuit reexamined the district court's findings of fact Berezowsky v. Ojeda (Berezowsky ), using Monasky's totality-of-circumstances test 765 F.3d 456 (5th Cir. 2014) and affirmed the district court's ruling. Sanchez v. R.G.L., 761 F.3d 495 (5th Cir. 2014) Facts Salazar v. Maimon, A father petitioned for the return of his four children to Argentina, alleging that Argentina was their ha- Larbie v. Larbie, bitual residence. The district court followed then- 690 F.3d 295 (5th Cir. 2012) binding circuit precedent2 that looked initially to whether the parents had a shared intent to aban- 94 Feale.d Appellant v. rSealed Appellee, don their previous habitual residence or to estab- lish a new one. England v. England, 234 F.3d 268 (5th Cir. 2000) The family moved to Argentina in June 2017. Eleven months later, while still in Argentina, the mother and father jointly filed for divorce. The district court found that the parents and children were born in the United States and were U.S. citizens. The father qualified for Argentinian citizenship but did not apply for it. The father's at-will employment contract allowed for home leave to San Francisco, and it provided a twenty- four-month housing allowance. The mother owned property in Texas that she had inherited, the children were enrolled in an American style school in Argentina, the parties had no property or family in Argentina, and the mother only had a three-month tourist visa to remain there. The parties' Argentinian divorce decree provided the mother with primary custody of Commentary-Smith v. Smith Page 1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most