Case Update (22 Oct 2025): Hala v. Anteby; default judgment was appropriate where alternative service standard was met and Petitioner demonstrated legal claim for child’s return

The parties are the unmarried parents of a child born by midwife at home in Israel on February 21, 2021. The parties lived together, but separated in December 2022, ultimately reaching an informal agreement to share custody of their child, with equal time-sharing. The parties had not begun the legal process of registering the child with the Israeli Ministry of the Interior until June 2022. They submitted DNA samples, a mutual affidavit to the court, and Respondent testified that Petitioner was the child’s father. The Mother was registered at this time as the child’s parent, but the Father was not, for a reason not delineated in the opinion. On July 29, 2023, the Respondent indicated a desire to go on a short vacation to another part of Israel with the child. She then stopped communicating with Petitioner, and, on August 1, 2023, her Mother in Brooklyn, New York advised the Petitioner that she and the child would not return to Israel, and that they were in Brooklyn. On August 4, 2023, the Petitioner filed an application with the Israeli Central Authority for the Hague Abduction Convention. This was delayed because of the Ministry of Interior not yet registering him as the child’s Father. On February 15, 2024, the Family Court in Israel certified that he was the Father. He then commenced the legal proceeding in the district court on May 20, 2024. A day later, the district court issued a show cause order. What ensued after was a series of attempts to serve the Mother at her parents’ address in Brooklyn. Ultimately various orders were served on either her mother or father personally at that address, and then by email to her email address, which the Petitioner later affirmed had a receipt acknowledgment by the Respondent.

The Petitioner, when Respondent never answered, sought a default judgment. In examining whether this was appropriate, the court looked at two things. First, the court had to confirm that the Respondent was served properly. Initially, the Court denied the Petitioner’s motion for default judgment, finding insufficient evidence of proper service. The Respondent was served at her parents’ residential address, but proper service still requires sufficient indicia/evidence of this residence being the Respondent’s usual place of abode. Unfortunately, Petitioner did not provide such evidence. Therefore, the court concluded service was improper. Having said that, Petitioner also requested permission for alternative service. He needed to show it would be impracticable to serve the Respondent by other methods in the New York CPLR. He argued that he made multiple efforts to locate respondent - private investigators, etc. - but, he could not locate her. He did note that he served her by email, and, further, he demonstrated that the email was likely to reach her, i.e., she apparently responded, acknowledging receipt and sharing information about mediation. The court has the discretion to permit alternative service, and because the email presumably reached the Respondent, the court permitted this service by this method.

Separately, the Petitioner needed to demonstrate his claim under the Hague Abduction Convention implementing statute. In this case, more specifically, he needed to demonstrate he had a right of custody at the time of her removal from Israel, particularly in that he had not yet been registered as the child’s Father with the Ministry of Interiors. He referenced the Israeli Legal Competency and Guardianship Law related to parents being the natural guardians of their children and having the duty to determine their place of residence. In other words, the court found that “parents are the guardians of their children by virtue of their birth alone [under Israeli law], even without having established legal parentage.” It is undisputed here, that this Petitioner is the child’s natural father. Therefore, the court concluded he did have a right of custody, and granted the default judgment.