Download full text
EN
Case Law Search
New searchCASE
Case Name
Ens Loblein v. Alcaraz de Ens, No. 3:25-cv-737 (E.D. Va. May 29, 2026)
INCADAT reference
HC/E/US 1762
Court
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division
First Instance
Robert E. Payne, Senior United States District Judge
States involved
PARAGUAY
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Decision
29 May 2026
Final
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
Return refused
International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA)
Miller v. Miller, 240 F.3d 392 (4th Cir. 2001); Bader v. Kramer, 484 F.3d 666 (4th Cir. 2007); Humphrey v. Humphrey, 434 F.3d 243 (4th Cir. 2006); Kovacic V. Harris, 328 F. Supp. 3d 508 (D. Md. 2018); Golan v. Saada, 596 U.S. 666 (2022); Luis Ischiu V. Gomez Garcia, 274 F. Supp. 3d 339 (D. Md. 2017) (quoting Simcox v. Simcox, 511 F.3d 594 (6th Cir. 2007); Whallon v. Lynn, 230 F.3d 450 (1st Cir. 2000); Walsh v. Walsh, 221 F.3d 204 (1st Cir. 2000)); Van De Sande v. Van De Sande, 431 F.3d 567 (7th Cir. 2005); Baran v. Beaty, 526 F.3d 1340 (11th Cir. 2008); Friedrich v. Friedrich, 78 F.3d 1060 (6th Cir. 1996) ("Friedrich II”); March v. Levine, 249 F.3d 462 (6th Cir. 2001); Lozano v. Montoya Alvarez, 572 U.S. 1 (2014); Acosta v. Acosta, 725 F.3d 868, 877 (8th Cir. 2013); Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987); Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012 (1988)
-
SYNOPSIS
Synopsis available in
EN
Two children wrongfully removed at ages 5 and 7 – Married parents – Joint custody – Children lived in Paraguay until November 2024 – Application for return filed on 15 September 2025 – Return refused – Main issue: Article 13(1)(b), grave risk of harm to the children and no protective measures to ameliorate the risk.
SUMMARY
Summary available in
EN
Facts
The parents met in 2013 and married in 2016. They had two children, born in Paraguay in 2017 and 2019.
The parents’ relationship was violent and the mother had contacted the police on multiple occasions to make complaints of domestic violence.
In November 2024 the mother asked to take the children to the USA to visit her mother who had been diagnosed with cancer. When they were in the USA the children remained in contact with the father.
In December 2024 the mother informed the father that she and the children would not be returning to Paraguay.
The father filed an application under the 1980 Hague Abduction Convention for the return of the children.
The mother argued that Article 13(1)(b) applied and that returning the children to Paraguay would expose them to physical or psychological harm.
Ruling
Return refused. There was a grave risk of harm to the children should they be returned to Paraguay and protective measures were not adequate to ameliorate this risk.
Grounds
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
The mother outlined multiple accounts of physical abuse of both her and the children. She said this abuse happened regularly and one of the children gave evidence to corroborate this. There were also concerns of sexually inappropriate behaviour. The father maintained that he only hit one of the children two times.
The Court found the mother’s evidence to be credible and held that there would be a grave risk of harm to the children should they be returned to Paraguay.
The Court then discussed whether, in the exercise of its discretion under the Convention, protective measures could be put in place to mitigate this risk of grave danger so as to justify ordering return of the children. Considering the decision in Golan v. Saada, 596 U.S. 666 (2022), the Court concluded that ameliorative measures from the Paraguayan authorities did not offer sufficient protection.
The Court also stated that, in such cases, the burden fell on the Respondent (in this case the mother) to establish that a grave risk exists, and it was then for the Applicant (in this case the father) to show that the authorities of the State of habitual residence could ameliorate this risk.