Date: 04-19-2001

Case Style: Perry A. March v. Lawrence E. Levine, et al.

Case Number: 00-6326, 00-6551

Judge: Suhrheinrich

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Plaintiff's Attorney: John E. Herbison, Nashville, Tennessee for Perry A. March

Defendant's Attorney: Gregory D. Smith and and James G. Martin, II of Stites & Harbison, Nashville, Tennessee and Mark H. Levine, Los Angeles, California for Lawsrence E. and Carolyn R. Levine

Description: This appeal involves the International Child Abduction Remedies Act ("ICARA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 11601-11610 (2000), which is a codification of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, opened for signature, Oct. 25, 1980, T.I.A.S. No. 11670, 1343 U.N.T.S. 89, 51 Fed. Reg. 10,493, 10,498 (app. B) (March 26, 1986) (hereinafter "Hague Convention"). The Hague Convention was adopted by the signatory nations "to protect children internationally from the harmful effects of their wrongful removal or retention and to establish procedures to ensure their prompt return to the State of their habitual residence, as well as to secure protection for rights of access." Hague Convention, pmbl.

Under the ICARA, a petitioner must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that his children were wrongfully removed or retained in breach of his custody rights under the laws of the Contracting State in which the children habitually resided before they were removed or retained. Hague Convention, arts. 3, 12; 42 U.S.C. § 11603(e)(1)(A). Once wrongful removal is shown, the children must be returned. Hague Convention, art. 12. However, a court is not bound to order return of the children if the respondents establish certain exceptions under the treaty. Hague Convention, art. 13. The ICARA requires that a respondent establish by clear and convincing evidence the grave risk of harm exception under article 13(b),(1) and the protection of fundamental freedom provision of article 20.(2) 42 U.S.C. § 11603(e)(2)(A). Notwithstanding these exceptions, the treaty further provides that "[t]he provisions of this Chapter [pertaining to return of children] do not limit the power of a judicial or administrative authority to order the return of the child at any time." Hague Convention, art. 18 (emphasis added).

). Respondents Lawrence E. Levine and Carolyn R. Levine ("the Levines"), the grandparents of two minors, Samson Leo March and Tzipora Josette March, appeal the order entered by the district court in this action under the ICARA and the Hague Convention which directed the Levines to immediately return the two minor children to their father in Mexico. Petitioner Perry A. March ("March"), the biological father of Samson and Tzipora, cross-appeals portions of the order decided adversely to him.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome: We AFFIRM the district court's order, adopting its well-reasoned opinion. See March v. Levine, ___ F. Supp. 2d ___, No. 3:00-0736 (M.D. Tenn. Oct. 4, 2000).

Plaintiff's Experts: Unknown

Defendant's Experts: Unknown

Comments: None