Miller v. Miller, 240 F.3d 392 (4th Cir. 2001)
Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the removal was wrongful and the level of risk required under Article 13(1)(b) had not been proved.
Norden-Powers and Beveridge v. Beveridge, 125 F.Supp.2d 634 (E.D.N.Y.2000)
Return ordered; the removal was wrongful having been in breach of actually exercised rights of custody and none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.
Silverman v. Silverman, 267 F.3d 788 (8th Cir. 2001)
Appeal allowed; case remitted to the District Court (federal jurisdiction) for a ruling to be made on the merits of the return application.
Toren v. Toren, 191 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 1999)
Non return order confirmed, but on the basis that the return application be dismissed, no retention having taken place.
Delvoye v. Lee, 329 F.3d 330 (3rd Cir. 2003)
Appeal dismissed and application dismissed; the retention was not wrongful as the child had never acquired a habitual residence in Belgium.
Blondin v. Dubois, 189 F.3d 240 (2d Cir. 1999)
Appeal allowed and case remitted to the District Court to consider remedies that might allow both the return of the children to their habitual residence and their protection from harm pending a custody hearing in France.
Gonzalez v. Gutierrez, 311 F.3d 942 (9th Cir 2002)
Appeal allowed and application dismissed; a right of veto over the removal of a child from the jurisdiction did not afford a non-custodial parent a “right of custody” for the purposes of the Convention.
Robinson v. Robinson, 983 F. Supp. 1339 (D. Colo. 1997)
Return refused; the removal was wrongful, but, the children were now settled in their new environment in accordance with Article 12(2).
Currier v. Currier, 845 F. Supp. 916 (D.N.H. 1994)
Return ordered; the standard required under Articles 13(1)(a) and 13(1)(b) had not been met.
Brooke v. Willis, 907 F. Supp. 57 (S.D.N.Y. 1995)
Writ of habeas corpus issued ordering the mother to produce the child in court within fourteen days and show cause why the child was removed.
