• 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 (2021): Lorenz v. Lorenz; waiver of “affirmative defense” under Hague Abduction Convention

Case Update (2021): Lorenz v. Lorenz; waiver of “affirmative defense” under Hague Abduction Convention

September 2, 2021

The Lorenz family, after some significant litigation, is proceeding towards a final resolution in the Hague Abduction Convention suit filed by Ms. Lorenz in the U.S. District Court for the ED of Michigan. As a preliminary matter, Ms. Lorenz filed a motion to waive “affirmative defense” and to prohibit the children from being interviewed as part of the case. On July 29, 2021, Magistrate Judge Kimberly Altman recommended that Ms. Lorenz’s motion be denied.

Ms. Lorenz filed her Hague Abduction Convention return suit on November 25, 2020. She alleged that Mr. Lorenz took their children from Germany to Michigan for a visit in July 2020, and was scheduled to return on September 5, 2020, but he never did. In this instant motion, she argued that Mr. Lorenz never raised the “affirmative defense” of a mature child’s objection to being returned to their habitual residence in his first responsive pleading or at any other time thereafter. Mr. Lorenz’s answer stated that the children wanted to live in the United States.

Pursuant to FRCP 8(c)(1), in a responsive pleading, a party must affirmatively state any affirmative defense, and failure to timely plead such a defense may result in the waiver and exclusion of the defense from the case. While Mr. Lorenz did not specifically raise the mature child’s objection “defense” in his Answer, he did specifically reference it in his Motion to Dismiss, filed on April 1, 2021, and included specific detail about the alleged objections. Ms. Lorenz had been on notice for at least 3 months that Mr. Lorenz intended to raise the mature child’s objection in his case-in-chief, and therefore, she had sufficient time to have the children evaluated or hire any experts. There has been no prejudice to Mr. Lorenz’s failure to state the “defense” in his Answer.

On August 13, 2021, the Court adopted Magistrate Judge Altman’s R&R.

Category iconabduction,  Child Abduction,  child testimony,  child's voice,  defense,  exception,  Hague Abduction Convention,  mature child

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe

Join 110 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