Chafin v. Chafin

568 U.S. 165 (2013) · Supreme Court of the United States · February 19, 2013 · No. No. 11-1347

Summary

The Supreme Court held that returning a child to a foreign country under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction does not render an appeal of the return order moot. The Court concluded that the possibility of a re-return order and vacatur of related expense orders constituted effectual, if partial, relief. It vacated the Eleventh Circuit's judgment and remanded the case.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Writing for the Court
Chief Justice Roberts; Roberts, C. J.; Scalia, J.; Kennedy, J.; Thomas, J.; Ginsburg, J.; Breyer, J.; Alito, J.; Sotomayor, J.; Kagan, J.
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
February 19, 2013
Docket number
No. 11-1347
Procedural posture
After the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted Lynne Chafin's petition under the Hague Convention and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act for the return of the parties' child to Scotland, Jeffrey Chafin appealed. The Eleventh Circuit dismissed the appeal as moot after the child was returned to Scotland. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court reviewed de novo the jurisdictional question whether the appeal was moot.
Parties
Jeffrey Lee Chafin v. Lynne Hales Chafin

Questions Presented

  1. Whether an appeal from a Hague Convention return order becomes moot when the child has already been returned to the foreign country.
  2. Whether the possibility of a re-return order, sanctions against a party within the court's personal jurisdiction, or vacatur of related expense orders constitutes effectual relief sufficient to preserve Article III jurisdiction.
  3. What procedures courts should use to protect prompt resolution of Hague Convention return proceedings while considering stays pending appeal.

Holdings

  1. The return of a child to a foreign country pursuant to a Hague Convention return order does not render an appeal of that order moot.
  2. The uncertainty that Scotland might not enforce a re-return order, or that Lynne Chafin might not comply with an order directed to her, does not make the appeal moot.

Factual background

Jeffrey Lee Chafin, a United States citizen, and Lynne Hales Chafin, a United Kingdom citizen, married in Germany and had a daughter. After the family lived in Alabama, Lynne Chafin was deported and later obtained an order under the Hague Convention and ICARA requiring the child's return to Scotland. The child was returned before Jeffrey Chafin's appeal was resolved, and Scottish custody proceedings followed.

Procedural history

The District Court held a bench trial, determined that Scotland was the child's country of habitual residence, and ordered the child's return. After the child departed for Scotland, the Eleventh Circuit dismissed the appeal as moot under Bekier v. Bekier and directed the District Court to dismiss and vacate its order. The District Court did so and separately ordered Jeffrey Chafin to pay more than $94,000 in expenses. The Supreme Court vacated the Eleventh Circuit's judgment and remanded.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…