Smedley v. Smedley

Filing 17

ORDER that the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to notice a hearing on 4/22/2014 at 9:30 a.m. Additionally, the court ordered Petitioner to take custody of the Children until the hearing on 4/22/2014. The court also ordered Petitioner and Respondent to pro vide the Clerk of Court with the Children's travel documents. Further, the court is denying 13 Motion to Strike. Counsel is reminded to read the order in its entirety for detailed information. Signed by Senior Judge James C. Fox on 4/15/2014. (Edwards, S.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
No. 7:14-CV-66-F
DANIELA SMEDLEY,

Petitioner,

v.
MARK A. SMEDLEY,

Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

Petitioner Daniela Smedley initiated this action by filing the Verified Petition Under Hague
Convention Seeking Return of Children to Petitioner, Immediate Issuance of Show Cause Order to
Respondent, and Hearing on the Merits [DE-l] ("Hague Petition"), seeking the return of her minor
children, A.H.S. and G.A.S. (or, collectively, "the Children"), pursuant to The Convention on the
Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Oct. 25, 1980, T.I.A.S. No. 11670 U.N.T.S. 49
("Hague Convention"). The matter came on for hearing before the undersigned on April15, 2014,
at 9:30a.m. Petitioner was present with her attorneys, Chad D. Hansen and Andrew W. Rinehart.
Respondent was present with his counsel, Clifton Jason Humphrey.
At the start of the hearing, Respondent's counsel asked for a continuance to prepare his
response to Plaintiffs Hague Petition, which was served on Respondent last week. In open court,
Respondent's request was allowed, and the Clerk of Court is therefore DIRECTED to notice a
hearing before the undersigned on April22, 2014 at 9:30a.m. The court ordered Petitioner to take
custody of the Children until the hearing on April 22, 2014. The court also ordered Petitioner and

Respondent to provide the Clerk of Court with the Children's travel documents.
Also before the court is the Respondent's Motion to Strike [DE-13] certain paragraphs and
footnotes from the Hague Petition on the grounds that (1) the paragraphs do not comply with the
rules of proper pleading and contain redundant, immaterial, or impertinent matter; (2) the paragraphs
contain the legal conclusions and/or conclusions of the Petitioner, and (3) the paragraphs contain
legal argument including the citation oflegal authority. Respondent's Motion to Strike [DE-13] is
DENIED. The court finds Respondent's arguments not to be well-suited to the nature of Hague
Convention litigation.
SO ORDERED.
This thel5th day of April, 2014.

enior United States District Judge

2