International Law – ICARA

Listen to this article

International Law
ICARA

In a dispute under the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, it is proper for the court to expedite the case, and deny additional discovery that would prolong it.

“[T]he denial of a continuance was the correct course here because of the time-sensitive nature of the case, filed as it was under an international convention designed to protect children unlawfully abducted to foreign countries. Courts have leeway to limit discovery in many circumstances where the additional discovery would undermine the litigation. See, e.g., Semien v. Life Ins. Co. of North America, 436 F.3d 805, 815 (7th Cir. 2006) (ERISA example). The Convention and its implementing Act are chock full of the language of urgency and in no uncertain terms contemplate expedited procedures to guarantee that children are returned quickly to the correct jurisdiction. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 11605 (providing relaxed rules for document authentication); id. § 11601(a)(4) (discussing the need for ‘prompt’ return); Hague Convention art. 1 (stating that a purpose of the Convention is ‘to secure the prompt return of children wrongfully removed’); id. art. 2 (requiring state parties to ‘use the most expeditious procedures available’); id. art. 11 (‘The judicial or administrative authorities . . . shall act expeditiously in proceedings for the return of children.’); id. art. 18 (‘The provisions of this Chapter do not limit the power of a judicial or administrative authority to order the return of the child at any time.’) (emphasis added). In that respect, the adjudication of a petition for return of a child is much like a district court’s exercise of equitable power in the context of a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order. In both circumstances, discovery often must proceed quickly, the district court must apprise itself of the relevant facts, and a decision must be rendered on an expedited basis. The Sixth Circuit in March v. Levine affirmed a district court’s decision to grant summary judgment to a father seeking return of his children to Mexico under the Convention without any discovery or evidentiary hearing at all. 249 F.3d at 473-75. Like the Sixth Circuit, we conclude that an expedited schedule is appropriate when a court is considering a petition for relief under the Convention. Nothing about the district court’s schedule in this case was at all objectionable, particularly in light of the lack of complaint about the materials actually produced.”

Affirmed.

10-2753 & 10-3887 Norinder v. Fuentes

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, Stiehl, J., Wood, J.

Full Text