Hayet Naser Gomez v. Alfredo Jose Salvi Fuenmayor, 812 F.3d 1005

Parents (Salvi and Naser) fought a custody dispute over daughter M.N.; Salvi was awarded primary custody by Venezuelan and U.S. courts while Naser retained supervised visitation.
Naser and her husband Molina made repeated threats against Salvi; a campaign of intimidation and violence followed (armed guards at court, surveillance, vandalism, drugs planted in Salvi's mother's car, and a shooting of Salvi's girlfriend minutes after Salvi and M.N. had been in the vehicle).
Fearing for their safety and unable to obtain effective local protection, Salvi left Venezuela for the U.S. with M.N. in violation of a Venezuelan order prohibiting the child from leaving the country.
Naser petitioned in U.S. district court under the Hague Convention for M.N.'s return; the district court found wrongful removal but rejected return under the Convention's "grave risk" exception, concluding by clear and convincing evidence that return would expose M.N. to physical or psychological harm.
On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding that serious threats and violence directed at a parent can constitute a grave risk to the child and that the uncontroverted record here met the clear-and-convincing standard.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Naser)	Defendant's Argument (Salvi)	Held
Whether threats/violence directed at a parent can constitute a "grave risk" to the child under the Hague Convention	Such threats are irrelevant or insufficient unless directed at the child	Serious threats/violence to a parent can pose a grave risk to the child (physical or psychological)	Court: Yes; serious threats/violence to a parent can establish a grave risk to the child
Whether Salvi proved a grave risk by clear and convincing evidence	Evidence does not directly tie Naser/Molina to violent acts and did not directly harm M.N.	Uncontroverted record of threats, shootings, vandalism, and planted drugs shows grave risk to child	Court: Yes; uncontroverted facts met the clear-and-convincing standard and justified denying return

Baran v. Beaty, 526 F.3d 1340 (11th Cir. 2008) (holding that violence directed at a parent can establish grave risk to a child)
Chafin v. Chafin, 742 F.3d 934 (11th Cir. 2014) (standards of review for Hague Convention appeals)
Abbott v. Abbott, 560 U.S. 1 (2010) (central purpose of the Convention is prompt return to habitual residence)
Walsh v. Walsh, 221 F.3d 204 (1st Cir. 2000) (grave-risk standard requires more than mere seriousness)
Van De Sande v. Van De Sande, 431 F.3d 567 (7th Cir. 2005) (domestic violence against a parent can create grave risk to children)
Ermini v. Vittori, 758 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2014) (spousal violence can support grave-risk finding, especially when child present)
Seaman v. Peterson, 766 F.3d 1252 (11th Cir. 2014) (district courts decide only Convention issues, not underlying custody merits)