Case Update (29 April 2025): Blasi v. Dunnagan; abstention is not appropriate in a federal Hague Abduction case when other suits are custody suits in Italy and Thailand
The parties are parents to one 7-year-old child who is the subject of at least 3 separate lawsuits: a custody lawsuit in Thailand (filed by Petitioner Father), a custody lawsuit in Italy (filed by Petitioner Father), and a request to return his daughter under the Hague Abduction Convention in a federal court in North Carolina. The Mother filed a motion in the federal court, asking that court to abstain from moving forward based on the other two lawsuits. The court examined this motion under the two prevailing cases on abstention - Younger and Colorado River, and concluded that abstention was not appropriate.
Under Younger, a federal court must abstain from interfering in state proceedings, even if the court has jurisdiction, when (1) there is an ongoing state judicial proceeding brought prior to substantial progress in the federal proceeding; that (2) implicates important, substantial, or vital state interests; and (3) provides adequate opportunity to raise constitutional challenges. Because there is no “state judicial proceeding” filed in this case, the Younger abstention doctrine does not even apply. Under Colorado River, the federal court must consider whether exceptional circumstances warrant declining jurisdiction due to a parallel lawsuit. Colorado River requires that the parallel proceedings involve substantially the same parties litigating substantially the same issues in different forums. Because there is no parallel lawsuit - only two custody lawsuits which are not the same as a Hague Abduction Convention return petition - abstention is inappropriate under Colorado River.
The court made one final comment - even if there had been a custody proceeding filed in North Carolina, “courts generally agree that abstention is improper when considering a wrongful removal petition.” In other words, custody and the Hague Abduction Convention are distinct - they are different proceedings entirely with different legal standards and different goals.
