In Ohlander v. Larson, 114 F.3d 1531 (10th Cir.1997), after the father took the child from Sweden to the United States without the mother's permission, she filed a Hague petition seeking the child's return to Sweden. She subsequently took the child from the United States to Sweden, in violation of a court order, and was found in contempt. The father then filed a Hague petition in Sweden for return of child to the United States. The mother filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss her district court petition. The District Court, denied her motion, and subsequently ordered the child's return to United States. The Court of Appeals held that district court abused its discretion in denying the motion to dismiss solely on the basis of the mother's contempt of its order not to remove the child, and dismissal of the petition was warranted.

It held that the mother should have been allowed to dismiss her Hague petition, as the father would not suffer legal prejudice from dismissal, claims and defenses of both the mother and father could be more fairly adjudicated in Sweden, and the failure to grant the motion could create a new incentive for parents to flee Hague Convention proceedings in hope of obtaining a second, more favorable Convention determination in another country.

The reasons the mother gave for granting her motion, including her contention that the petition was moot because the child was no longer in the United States, that the Convention allowed for dismissal of proceedings under such circumstances, and that the father had initiated a duplicative action in Sweden, were not insufficient such that they prejudiced the father.