"child custody" "child support" New York Family Law"

 

 

 

   

                  New York Divorce and Family Law  

      nysdivorce.com    brandeslaw.com

The definitive site on the web for New York Divorce and Family Law.

 

 

[HOME]

[SITE MAP]

ARTICLES  BY SUBJECT

Adoption

Agreements

Alimony, Maintenance and Spousal Support

Child Abuse

Child Abduction

Child Custody and Parental Alienation

Child Support

Child Visitation

Common Law Marriage

Domestic Violence

Degrees and Licenses

Engagement Gifts

Enforcement

Grandparent Visitation and Non-Parent Visitation

Grounds For Divorce

International Child Abduction

Legal Fee Awards and Awards For Expenses

Litigation and Procedure

Marital Property

Property Distribution

Questions About Taxes

Retirement Benefits

Separate Property

Spousal Support

Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Norden-Powers v. Beveridge, 125 F.Supp.2d 634 (E. D. N. Y. 2000)

 

In Norden-Powers v. Beveridge, 125 F.Supp.2d 634 (E. D. N. Y. 2000), Australian fathers petitioned for return of their children removed to United States by the mother. The District Court held that the mother removed the children from Australia in violation of the fathers' rights of custody, and failed to establish that fathers were not exercising their rights or that the children objected to return.

The fathers who were awarded "joint parental responsibility" by Australian courts, and whose exercise of parental rights had been sanctioned by Australian judicial decisions and agreements with the mother, possessed "rights of custody."

The mother failed to establish that the fathers were not exercising their rights. The fathers had participated in decision-making regarding education and social welfare of their children, looked after their medical needs and participated in the care of the person of each child, and had each contacted their children less then 16 days before their removal.

Voiced concerns of the children to stay with their mother did not rise to the level of "objection to return".

 

Go To Top of Page