Case Update (12 April 2022): Soberano v. Guillen; sanctions against Petitioner's Attorney
Approximately 1-2 weeks after the District Court held its evidentiary hearing in the Hague Abduction return proceeding filed by Ms. Silva, the parties signed a settlement agreement that the children could remain in the United States with Respondent. Nonetheless, after the agreement was signed, Ms. Silva began calling and leaving messages for the court, emphasizing the need for a final disposition on the Petitioner's return request. On February 17, 2022, the Courtroom Deputy emailed both counsel apprising them of Ms. Silva's requests for a disposition, at which time, Respondent's lawyer notified the court that the parties had reached an agreement that resolved the Hague return petition, and provided evidence that she had asked Ms. Silva about notifying the court. The court scheduled a subsequent hearing to resolve the sequence of relevant events and to better understand the parties' agreement, vis-a-vis this Hague Abduction return suit. The court concluded that the agreement resolved the central question related to the children's return. It then turned to Ms. Silva's behavior.
The court indicated that "[a]t numerous points throughout this case, the Court was concerned by Ms. Silva's actions. On several occasions, the Court shared, or attempted to share, its concerns with Ms. Silva. But the Court's efforts were generally met with indignation and argument."
Ultimately, the court sanctioned Ms. Silva in an amount equal to the Respondent's translation of the agreement to English (something that would need not be done, but for Ms. Silva's actions), provided a copy of its sanctions order to the U.S. Department of State (who presumably had provided Ms. Silva's name to the Petitioner), and filed a grievance with the Washington State Bar Association to determine if disciplinary action is warranted.