In re the Marriage of Pitcairn and Renaud
20-1713
| Iowa Ct. App. | Jun 30, 2021Background:
- Pitcairn and Renaud married in France (2005) and lived there for most of the marriage; the parties have two children with dual citizenship and Renaud is a French citizen.
- The parties own real estate, bank accounts, businesses, and other assets primarily located in France/Europe; they executed a premarital agreement governed by French law.
- Renaud filed for divorce in France (Feb 2020); Pitcairn later filed for dissolution in Iowa (Aug 2020) and initiated a UCCJEA custody action in Johnson County.
- Renaud moved to dismiss Pitcairn’s Iowa dissolution petition, asserting insufficiency of service and forum non conveniens; the district court denied dismissal for insufficiency of service but granted dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds.
- The district court emphasized administrative difficulty: foreign assets, foreign-language documents, likely need for French valuation experts and witnesses located abroad, and the premarital agreement governed by French law.
- Pitcairn appealed the forum non conveniens dismissal; both parties sought appellate attorney fees.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court abused its discretion in dismissing on forum non conveniens | Pitcairn: Iowa is an appropriate forum; dismissal was improper | Renaud: France is the more convenient and appropriate forum given contacts, assets, law, and witnesses | Affirmed—no abuse of discretion; substantial evidence supports dismissal |
| Whether Renaud presented sufficient evidence to support the motion | Pitcairn: Renaud failed to submit affidavits/evidence with his motion | Renaud: Judicially noticed custody file and other facts supplied adequate evidence and inferences | Affirmed—court reasonably relied on judicially noticed materials and inferences |
| Whether property division, witness availability, and enforceability favor Iowa or France | Pitcairn: Enforcement and administration can occur in Iowa; Renaud has cooperated so far | Renaud: Most assets, witnesses, documents, and governing law are in France/Europe; translation and foreign experts required | Affirmed—administrative burdens, foreign evidence, and applicable law favor France |
| Entitlement to appellate attorney fees | Both parties sought fees | Both parties argued for fees | Denied—court declined to award appellate attorney fees |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Kimura, 471 N.W.2d 869 (Iowa 1991) (sets forum non conveniens test and factors for domestic relations cases)
- Silversmith v. Kenosha Auto Transp., 301 N.W.2d 725 (Iowa 1981) (forum non conveniens standards and balancing of private/public interests)
- In re Marriage of Okland, 699 N.W.2d 260 (Iowa 2005) (standards for awarding appellate attorney fees)
- In re Marriage of McDermott, 827 N.W.2d 671 (Iowa 2013) (factors for considering appellate fee awards)