O.D.Q. V. P.R.C
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, A.D. 2005 O.D.Q., ** Appellant, vs. ** ** P.R.C., CASE NO. 3D03-3047 ** Appellee. ** LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 03-14600 ** Opinion filed December 14, 2005. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Celeste H. Muir, Judge. Marks & West and Janice R. Barnes, for appellant. Kohlman Hamlin and Robert Kohlman, for appellee. Before COPE, C.J., and FLETCHER and CORTIÃ AS, JJ. PER CURIAM. The father appeals the denial of his petition for return of children under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. We affirm. The parties were divorced in their home country and the mother was named the custodial parent in the divorce decree. written before agreement the between decree, the the parties entered mother granted the into father custody so that she could move to the United States. the father moved to a third country. By shortly temporary Thereafter With the consent of the mother, he took the minor children with him. After the children had been in the father s custody for about twenty-one months, the mother invited them to come to the United States and the father sent them to visit the mother. There was conflicting testimony about whether this was supposed to be a temporary visit, or a permanent relocation. After hearing the evidence, the trial court apparently concluded that the mother told the father it would be a visit and did not inform the father that the children would not return. The father filed a petition for return of the children to him. The trial court denied the petition. conducted an evidentiary hearing and The court reasoned that under the divorce decree of the parties country of origin, the mother had been designated the custodial parent. The parties agreement was for the father to have temporary custody only. The mother had a right to terminate the temporary custody agreement. She did so and resumed her custody rights within a reasonable time under 2 the circumstances. We conclude that the within its discretion in denying the petition. Affirmed. 3 trial court acted
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
