16 F.4th 450
5th Cir.2021Background
- Parties: Christopher Ryan Harm (UK/Northern Ireland father) v. Meschiya Rachel Lake-Harm (U.S. mother); child SLH born in New Orleans Jan. 15, 2017.
- Family moved to Ireland in July 2018; parents discussed an Ireland “home base” for EU residency, but lived largely apart and the marriage deteriorated.
- Mother is a touring professional musician who frequently traveled internationally with SLH; father consented to most travel and cared for SLH when present in Ireland.
- Mother obtained Irish residency paperwork (Stamp 4, PPS number, EU health card); child received PPS number, GP Visit Card, and some medical care in Ireland.
- Mother returned to the United States with SLH on May 21, 2019; father sued in U.S. district court under the Hague Convention alleging wrongful removal.
- District court found SLH’s presence in Ireland was transitory and that the United States remained her habitual residence; Fifth Circuit affirmed under clear-error review applying the totality-of-the-circumstances test.
Issues
| Issue | Harm's Argument | Lake-Harm's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether SLH acquired habitual residence in Ireland | Father: Ireland became habitual residence due to move, residency steps, local services | Mother: SLH’s time in Ireland was brief/intermittent; mother’s travel and ties to U.S. show transitory presence | Court: Held transitory; U.S. remained habitual residence (affirmed) |
| Standard of review; use of post-removal facts | Father: District court wrongly relied on some post-removal facts and misapplied habitual-residence factors | Mother: Trial court applied totality-of-the-circumstances; fact findings should be deferred to | Court: Applied Monasky totality test; noted one post-removal fact error but deemed it not clearly erroneous and affirmed under deferential review |
Key Cases Cited
- Monasky v. Taglieri, 140 S. Ct. 719 (2020) (adopts totality-of-the-circumstances test; habitual residence is a mixed question, defer to trial factfinder)
- U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, 138 S. Ct. 960 (2018) (describes mixed question framework used in Monasky)
- United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364 (1948) (defines clear-error standard)
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 (1985) (appellate courts must not reverse factual findings unless clearly erroneous)