Case Update (9 March 2026): Armand v. Armand; error to not address process for hearing children when Respondent plead mature child exception and requested interview of children
Almost one year ago, the Armand family received a decision from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, ordering the parties’ two children be returned to France under the Hague Abduction Convention. The two issues that the district court focused on were the habitual residence of the children and whether returning them would expose them to a grave risk of harm. The Respondent Mother also argued that the children were mature and objected to return, but did not present evidence of this exception.
The Mother appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The Eighth Circuit noted, in its opinion, that the Respondent Mother requested that the children by interviewed - either in camera by the court or by a forensic psychologist - to assist in establishing that the children were mature and objected to their return. She apparently renewed this request in her pre-hearing brief. However, the district court failed to address this request.
The Eighth Circuit, finding that the district court’s failure to address the Mother’s request to hear from the children was error, vacated the return order and remanded with “the instruction that the court first address Armand’s request for an interview of the children for purposes of establishing a ‘mature child’ defense prior to ruling on the merits of the petition.”
As a note, this is not a determination on the merits. The Court took no opinion as to whether the children should be returned to France. Instead, the Court simply determined that the district court failed in process, and should adhere to the proper process prior to making its determination on return. It is now nearing one year since the district court ordered the children’s return. The original petition seeking the children’s return was filed on July 15, 2024. It is unclear, from a review of the docket, as to whether the return order was stayed pending appeal.
