A Child is Missing: The International Child Abduction Blog

In our International Child Abduction Blog we report Hague Convention Child Abduction Cases decided by the US Supreme Court, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, Circuit Courts of Appeals, district courts and New York State Courts. We also provide information to help legal practitioners understand the basic issues, discover what questions to ask and learn where to look for more information when there is a child abduction that crosses country boarders.

Monday, May 23, 2016

Sabogal v. Velarde, 2015 WL 9906163 [D. Maryland] [Peru] [Federal & State Judicial Remedies] [Motion to find that Petitioner complied with undertakings order denied]

Motion to find that Petitioner complied with undertakings order denied

No comments:

What this Blog is About

This blog is dedicated to all of those parents, relatives and friends of persons whose children are missing and have been abducted by a parent, to another country. The Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, commonly referred to as the Hague Convention, established procedures to enable parents to obtain the prompt return, to their country of habitual residence, of children who have been unlawfully removed or retained in another country. In this blog we will focus on providing information with regard to what to do where there is a child abduction that crosses country boarders.

Bari Brandes Corbin and Evan B. Brandes are regular contributors to this blog. Bari Brandes Corbin, of the New York Bar, is co-author of Law and the Family New York, Second Edition, Revised, Volumes 5 & 6 (Thomson-Reuters). Evan B. Brandes is a member of the New York and Massachusetts Bars, and a Solicitor in New South Wales, Australia . The authors write the annual updates to Law and the Family New York, Second Edition Revised, and Law and the Family New York Forms.

Disclaimer Notice:

The information on this site pertains to New York law and is offered as a public service. It is not intended to give legal advice about a specific legal problem. Due to the importance of the individual facts of every case, the information on this site may not necessarily be applicable to any particular case. Changes in the law could at any time make parts of this web site obsolete. The information on this web site was not necessarily written by persons licensed to practice law in a particular jurisdiction. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal advice and this publication is not intended to give legal advice about a specific legal problem, nor is it a substitute for the advice of an attorney. This information is provided with the understanding that if legal advice is required the services of a competent attorney should be sought.

Our web site has many links to web sites of other organizations, including, but not limited to court systems, publishers of legal information, agencies, educational institutions, profit making companies and non-profit associations. While we offer these electronic links for your convenience in accessing New York Divorce and Family Law related information, please be aware that when you exit our web site, the privacy policy stated on our web site may not be the same as that on other web sites. In addition, we cannot attest to the accuracy of the information provided by linked sites. Linking to a web site does not constitute an endorsement by us of the information presented on the linked site or the products that may be sold on the linked site.

Potential clients of any law firm listed on this site are advised to read the Revised Form of Statement of Client’s Rights and Responsibilities pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1400.2, effective February 15, 2019, which New York matrimonial attorneys are required to provide to them at the initial consultation, as well as the Statement of Clients Rights and Responsibilities. (This blog is considered Attorney Advertising by New York Court rules).

A Child is Missing: The International Child Abduction Blog

Search This Blog

Monday, May 23, 2016

Sabogal v. Velarde, 2015 WL 9906163 [D. Maryland] [Peru] [Federal & State Judicial Remedies] [Motion to find that Petitioner complied with undertakings order denied]

No comments:

Post a Comment