Robert Silverman v. Julie Silverman

Robert Hechter Silverman and Julie Hechter Silverman were married in 1989,
and they have two children, ages 6 and 9. In 1995, the Silvermans moved from
Poughkeepsie, New York to Plymouth, Minnesota, where they lived until August 1999,
when they moved to Israel. In October of that year, the Silvermans filed a voluntary
petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court in which they declared under penalty of
perjury that they were residing in Plymouth.

In June 2000, Julie2 left Israel with the children. She had obtained round-trip
tickets with a scheduled return to Israel in August 2000, and had secured Robert’s
written permission to take the children across international borders while “on
vacation.” Before she and the children were scheduled to return to Israel, however,
Julie filed a petition in Minnesota state court seeking a legal separation from Robert
and custody of the children. Robert was personally served in Israel.

Pursuant to the Hague Convention, Robert filed a “Request for Return of
Abducted Children” with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
(NCMEC)3 on August 24, 2000. On October 5, 2000, Robert filed a Hague petition
seeking the return of the children in federal district court, and an evidentiary hearing
was scheduled for November 8, 2000. He also filed a motion with the Minnesota court
on October 10, 2000, seeking either dismissal of the custody proceedings for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction in light of the Hague Convention, or a stay of the custody
proceedings pending resolution of his NCMEC request. He did not file a Hague
Convention petition with the state court.

* * *

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

Because the Hague issue has not been addressed, we believe the appropriate
course of action is to remand the matter to the district court to consider whether the
Silverman children were wrongfully removed. We note that nearly a year has passed
since Robert filed his petition under the Hague Convention, due in no small part to our
own consideration of the case. This matter warrants prompt resolution.

The matter is remanded to the district court for further proceedings not
inconsistent with this opinion. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Unknown

Unknown

None