• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer navigation
  • Washington, D.C.
  • melissa@mkfamily.law
  • (202) 713-5165
  • mkfamily.law
Family Law Across Borders

Family Law Across Borders

International Family Law Resources

  • About MKFL
  • Websites
  • Blog
  • FAQ
  • Articles
  • Books
  • Videos
  • Events
  • Contact

Case Update (2020): Kwon v. Park; Divorce, Simultaneous Proceedings, and Forum-Shopping

Case Update (2020): Kwon v. Park; Divorce, Simultaneous Proceedings, and Forum-Shopping

May 5, 2020

The Court of Appeal of the State of California (4th Appellate District – Division 3) issued an unpublished opinion on April 24, 2020 in Kwon v. Park (G057226) addressing a variety of  issues in a couple’s multi-jurisdictional divorce. 
Ms. Kwon and Mr. Park are embroiled in divorce litigation in both Korea and California.  To get a fuller picture of the multi-jurisdictional interplay, one needs to also review the briefs in this case.  
The spouses in this case are both Korean nationals who had a residence in Irvine, CA.   The parties separated in mid-2017 and Ms. Kwon filed a petition for dissolution in California shortly thereafter.  In her petition, she listed the marital assets of which she was aware, but noted a need for pre-trial discovery to fully understand all the assets.  Ms. Kwon then proceeded to serve Mr. Park with a variety of CA pleadings, including subpoenas duces tecum, letters rogatory to discover assets in Mexico, and a preliminary declaration of disclosure.  Approximately 1 1/2 months after the CA case was initiated, and shortly after Ms. Kwon served certain discovery on Mr. Park, Mr. Park filed a Korean divorce action.  The Korean court learned of the CA case, and expressed concerns of conflicting judgments.  Ultimately, the Korean court held its case in abeyance, waiting for some resolution in the CA case.
Mr. Park chose not to participate in the CA case, and a default judgment was entered.  Mr. Park then filed a series of motions, none granted, trying to set aside the CA action and quash the discovery attempts by Ms. Kwon.  
This case holds interest for the international practitioner and gives a glimpse into forum-shopping in divorce proceedings.   It underscores the differences between the disclosures that are usual in a court case in Korea versus California.  It also gives the reader a sense of judicial cooperation, with the Korean judge expressing concern over conflicting judgments. 
Above all, the opinion underpins the genuine need for legal counsel in both countries early in the case to ensure a full examination of all the pertinent issues and to address any forum-shopping.

Category icondissolution,  divorce,  forum-shopping,  jurisdiction

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe

Join 109 others, and get a notification to our new posts right on your inbox.

We promise we’ll never spam! Only notifications of new posts.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

The use of the name MK Family Law is protected as are the logo and content of this website. The information is provided by MK Family Law and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

© 2023 · MK Family Law · All Rights Reserved · Developed by RDK

  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Attorney Advertising