Blanc v. Morgan

Decision Date09 July 2010
Docket NumberCase No. 2:10-cv-02314.
Citation721 F.Supp.2d 749
CourtU.S. District Court — Western District of Tennessee
PartiesJean-Christophe BLANC, France, Petitioner, v. Jennifer MORGAN, Respondent.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.

C. Suzanne Landers, Lucie K. Brackin, The Landers Firm, Memphis, TN, for Petitioner.

Lauren Pasley-Ward, Law Office of Lauren Pasley-Ward, Memphis, TN, for Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING VERIFIED PETITION FOR RETURN OF CHILD

BERNICE BOUIE DONALD, District Judge.

On April 27, 2010, Petitioner Jean-Christophe Blanc (Father) filed a verified petition in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee pursuant to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“Hague Convention” or “Convention”), Oct. 24, 1980, T.I.A.S. No. 11670, S. Treaty Doc. No. 99-11, and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, 42 U.S.C. § 11601 et seq. In addition to other ancillary relief, Father seeks an order compelling the return of his daughter, “M.” 1 -age four-from M.'s mother, Respondent Jennifer Morgan (Mother). 2 Mother filed a verified answer on May 17, 2010. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (“The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.”) and 42 U.S.C. § 11603(a) (“The courts of the States and the United States district courts shall have concurrent original jurisdiction of actions arising under the Convention.”). On Thursday, July 1, 2010, 3 the Court conducted an evidentiary hearing at which the Court heard from three witnesses: Father, Mother, and Mother's mother (Ms. Sharon Morgan). After reviewing the evidence, considering the testimony of the witnesses called by each party, and weighing the credibility of those witnesses, the Court GRANTS Father's petition for the reasons stated herein.

I. FINDINGS OF FACT 4

Father, age 44, is a citizen and resident of France. Mother, age 33, is a citizen and resident of the United States and currently resides in the Cordova area of Shelby County, Tennessee. Mother and Father first met in 1998 or 1999 5 when Mother applied for a position with a Memphis restaurant at which Father was then employed as an executive chef. Shortly thereafter, the restaurant hired Mother as a pastry chef. During the course of their employment at the restaurant, Mother and Father began a romantic relationship.

In early February 2001, Mother and Father together moved to France. Upon first arriving in France, Mother and Father lived with Father's mother. Soon after Mother and Father began living with Father's mother, Father and Father's mother became engaged in an argument. In the course of the argument, Father's mother physically attacked Mother, pulled Mother's hair, and knocked Mother to the ground. Father intervened in an effort to stop the attack. Mother attempted to place a phone call to authorities for help, but Father's mother disconnected the phone before Mother could complete the call. After this incident, Mother and Father moved out of Father's mother's house, first staying with friends and later moving into their own apartment. Father then contracted for the construction of a house into which Mother and Father moved upon its completion.

Mother and Father continued their romantic relationship while living together in Juvignac, France, though they never married. Mother worked with Father in a restaurant at which they were the only two employees. Each year, Mother applied for and received a carte de séjour-roughly the French equivalent of a U.S. green card-which allowed her to stay in France. Mother also took a course and received a certificate enabling her to teach English as a second language in France, but she was never able to secure a teaching position. In 2005, Mother became pregnant with M. by Father, 6 and M. was born January 2, 2006 in Montpellier, France. Once M. was born, Mother completed paperwork with the U.S. Consul in Paris and obtained official recognition of M.'s birth abroad and U.S. citizenship. Accordingly, M. is a citizen of both France and the United States. After M.'s birth, Mother-with Father's consent-took M. on trips to the United States on five separate occasions, staying for at least a month each time before returning to France.

Even before the birth of their daughter, Mother and Father's relationship was ambivalent, and Mother was frequently unhappy, in large part due to the fact that she did not speak French very well and had very few friends in France. It also appears that after M.'s birth, Mother and Father's relationship deteriorated further-the two ceased having a sexual relationship-and Mother told Father on many different occasions that she was going to leave him. Mother testified that she and Father argued with increased frequency over time and that, as time passed, Father's comments to Mother became verbally and psychologically abusive. 7 In her testimony, however, Mother was unable to identify any instances of physical abuse toward her by Father. The record also lacks any evidence that Father ever physically abused M. or made abusive comments to the child. Although M. may not have as strong a relationship with Father as with Mother, the Court credits Father's testimony that he is close to M. and is involved in her life. 8

In the summer of 2008, an incident occurred in which Father returned to the couple's home inebriated by an evening of drinking, began vomiting, and passed out. Mother attended to Father, but the next morning Father became angry with Mother because he felt that Mother had been insufficiently concerned about the nature of his condition and had thereby placed his life in jeopardy. Mother testified that after this incident she decided she needed to terminate her relationship with Father. Around this same point in time, Mother learned from a French dermatologist that she had carcinoma, but it appears that the seriousness of this diagnosis was not fully appreciated at the time-at least not by Father, and perhaps not by Mother as well.

In September 2008, Father drove Mother and M. to the airport for their departure on yet another trip to the United States. Father testified that when Mother and M. left for the United States in September 2008, he fully expected that the two would return to France after a month or so, as had been the case with their previous trips. Given all of the surrounding facts, the Court finds that Father's belief about Mother's intentions was reasonable. Specifically, Mother had purchased roundtrip tickets, left a large amount of clothing and other personal items at their home in France, did not close her French bank account, and kept bills jointly in her and Father's names. Mother also asked Father to pick up her renewed carte de séjour, as it was issued shortly after she departed for the United States.

In the United States, Mother and M. moved in with Mother's mother-Ms. Sharon Morgan-with whom the two have lived since. Mother has remained in regular and frequent contact with Father since returning to the United States and has allowed contact between M. and Father through Skype and telephone calls to the extent feasible for a young child. Once in the United States, Mother began a course of treatment for her cancer, including a major surgical operation in December 2008-all of which Mother communicated to Father. In October 2008, Mother secured employment with FedEx in Memphis, which she has maintained. Mother sent Father a Christmas card in December 2008 signed “Love, Whitney and [M.].” (July 1, 2010 Evid. Hr'g Ex. 17: Christmas Card.)

Father visited Mother and M. in Memphis in February 2009. During the trip, Father slept in Mother's room in the home of Mother's mother, while Mother slept on a couch in another room of the house. Mother rebuffed Father's attempts to show Mother physical affection and refused to commit to return to France at a precise time in the future. Father testified that he proposed marriage during this trip, but in her testimony Mother adamantly denied that Father proposed to her. Mother admitted that she probably told Father at this time that their relationship was over. During his trip, Father broached with Mother the possibility that he would retain an attorney to protect his parental rights, though Father's testimony indicated that he may have sought legal advice even before February 2009.

Based upon Mother's comments to him during his February 2009 trip and developments in the weeks that followed, Father concluded that Mother no longer intended to return to live with him in France and that legal action to protect his parental rights was necessary. Acting through counsel, Father then initiated legal proceedings in April 2009 by summoning Mother to appear at a hearing before the family affairs judge of the County Court of Montpellier (France). Mother, however, did not receive proper process or timely notice of the court's scheduled hearing. On June 18, 2009, the Montpellier County Court held a hearing at which Father presented evidence regarding Mother's removal of M. to the United States and her refusal to return to France with the child. Lacking notice of the hearing, Mother did not appear. The court apparently took the matter under advisement, as it did not immediately issue a ruling. Mother received her first legal papers related to these proceedings on July 13, 2009. Upon receiving papers in July, Mother retained an attorney in Memphis, who then contacted Father's counsel in France on Mother's behalf.

The Montpellier County Court issued its decision on September 3, 2009. Translated, the court's order reads, in pertinent part, as follows:

At the hearing of June 18, 2009, [Father] states that on September 19, 2008, [Mother] told him she wanted to go for a few weeks to the USA to her parents' home to review the future of their...

To continue reading

Request your trial
25 cases
  • Cunningham v. Cunningham
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • February 17, 2017
    ...in a comfortable and stable home and had close relationships with her relatives, but no connections to community); Blanc v. Morgan , 721 F.Supp.2d 749, 764 (W.D. Tenn. 2010) (finding four-year old child was not well-settled despite respondent's stable home and employment, and child's regula......
  • Dumitrascu v. Dumitrascu
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Colorado
    • September 15, 2021
    ... ... home and had close relationships with her relatives, but no ... connections to community); Blanc v. Morgan , 721 ... F.Supp.2d 749, 764 (W.D. Tenn. 2010) (finding four-year-old ... child was not well-settled despite respondent's ... ...
  • Didon v. Castillo
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • September 26, 2016
    ...the Hague Convention. Id.18 Accord Panteleris v. Panteleris , 30 F.Supp.3d 674, 682 (N.D. Ohio 2014) (same); Blanc v. Morgan , 721 F.Supp.2d 749, 760 (W.D. Tenn. 2010) (same); In re Morris , 55 F.Supp.2d 1156, 1161 (D. Colo. 1999) (same); Freier v. Freier , 969 F.Supp. 436, 440 (E.D. Mich. ......
  • Babcock v. Babcock
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Iowa
    • November 30, 2020
    ..."was not resting on [her] rights but [was] instead acting in good faith and with reasonable diligence." Blanc v. Morgan , 721 F. Supp. 2d 749, 764–65 (W.D. Tenn. 2010). Plaintiff presented evidence that upon realizing Defendant had not sent N.J.B. back to Canada with his brothers, she immed......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT