FAMILY LAW CASES

• Geiger v. Foley Hoag LLP Retirement Plan
• James v. Mukasey
• Smith v. Williams-Ash
• Miah v. Mukasey
• Chu v. Hong
• Alfonso v. Skadden
• Shasta County Dep't of Soc. Serv. v. Ronald F.
• Plumas County Child Support Serv. v. Rodriquez
• Estate of McDaniel

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, March 27, 2008
Geiger v. Foley Hoag LLP Retirement Plan , No. 07-1208
In a action against retire plans administrators involving the transfer of marital property interests pursuant to a Massachusetts divorce, grant of ex-spouse's motion to intervene as well as a motion to dismiss is affirmed over claims that the district court erred in: 1) allowing the intervention; and 2) granting the motion to dismiss. Read more...

U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, March 25, 2008
James v. Mukasey, No. 06-5163
Petition for review of a BIA decision finding petitioner removable for having committed an aggravated felony is granted in part, dismiss in part, and vacated in part where: 1) the BIA's decision on the issue was based on an incorrect premise in assuming that courts treat petitioner's statute of conviction, New York Penal Law section 260.10, as divisible when in fact that is an open question; and 2) reconsideration is warranted as to whether petitioner's conviction for Endangering the Welfare of a Child under New York law constitutes the aggravated felony of sexual abuse of a minor under the INA. Read more...

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, March 26, 2008
Smith v. Williams-Ash, No. 06-4638
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action against a social worker claiming violation of their due process right to a hearing before the temporary removal of their children from their home, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where the district court correctly held that plaintiffs were not entitled to a hearing because they consented to the removal of their children pursuant to a voluntary "safety plan." Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, March 25, 2008
Miah v. Mukasey , No. 06-2649, 06-3712
Petition for review of the BIA's determination of ineligibility for asylum and withholding of removal, as well as its refusal to reopen petitioner's removal proceeding, is denied where: 1) substantial evidence supported determinations that petitioner was ineligible for asylum; and 2) the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to reopen to obtain adjustment of status. Read more...

Supreme Court of Texas, March 28, 2008
Chu v. Hong, No. 06-0127
In a case where a husband sold community property to a 3rd party without his wife's consent when divorce was imminent, a court of appeals decision affirming a trial court's judgment ordering return of that property to the wife by the 3rd party is reversed where the community property must be recovered from the spouse who took it before allowing the other spouse to recover damages. Read more...

Supreme Court of Texas, March 28, 2008
Alfonso v. Skadden, No. 07-0321
Courts must indulge all reasonable presumptions favorable to a judgment under collateral attack; however, they cannot indulge a presumption that the record itself shows is untrue. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, March 24, 2008
Shasta County Dep't of Soc. Serv. v. Ronald F., No. C055107
In a child custody battle raising paternity issues, a judgment of disposition is affirmed over claims that juvenile court erred in failing to: 1) set aside a voluntary declaration of paternity executed by another man; 2) find defendant was the presumed father under the holding of Adoption of Kelsey S., 1 Cal.4th 816 (1992); and 3) require compliance with newly enacted section 224.3(e)(1), relating to notice under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). Read more...

California Appellate Districts, March 26, 2008
Plumas County Child Support Serv. v. Rodriquez, No. C055005
In a dispute about child support payments from a "custodian parent", a "primary custodian parent" has no obligation under the Family Code to pay money for the support of a child within her custody, albeit living with a third-party relative, in short of a contractual agreement with the third party. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, March 27, 2008
Estate of McDaniel, No. C054314
In an intestacy situation where a husband deceased before the effective date of a stipulated judgment dissolving the marital partnership, the trial court properly found that the wife was not entitled to an intestate share as a "surviving spouse" within the meaning of section 78 of the Probate Code because she was by the time of decedent's death "a party to a valid proceeding concluded by an order purporting to terminate all marital rights" within the meaning of 78(d). Read more...