Sanchez v. Sanchez et al

Filing 57

ORDER GRANTING 52 Motion to Stay pending appeal. Signed by Judge Xavier Rodriguez. (rf)

In the United States District Court
for the
Western District of Texas
ANGELICA LOPEZ SANCHEZ
v.
MIRIAM LOPEZ SANCHEZ, ET AL.

§
§
§
§
§

SA-12-CV-568-XR

ORDER
On this day came on to be considered Movants’ Emergency Motion for Stay of this
Court’s Order, entered on August 3rd, 2012, pending Movants’ appeal of such Order to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
In United States v. Baylor Univ. Medical Ctr., 711 F.2d 38, 39 (5th Cir. 1983), the Fifth
Circuit set forth the criteria for a stay pending appeal as follows: (1) whether the movant has
made a showing of likelihood of success on the merits, (2) whether the movant has made a
showing of irreparable injury if the stay is not granted, (3) whether the granting of the stay would
substantially harm the other parties, and (4) whether the granting of the stay would serve the
public interest. Additionally, the Fifth Circuit has also held, in Ruiz v. Estelle, 650 F.2d 555 (5th
Cir. 1981), that a movant “need only present a substantial case on the merits when a serious legal
question is involved and show that the balance of equities weighs heavily in the favor of granting
the stay.”
In this case the Court found that Respondent and the Movants failed to establish by clear
and convincing evidence that there is a grave risk that the children's return would expose the
children to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the children in an intolerable
situation. The Court found that the age of maturity exception under the Hague Convention also
failed.

The Court continues to find that the movant has not made a showing of a likelihood of
success on the merits. The Movants allude to “facts,” but failed to tender to this Court in these
proceedings any competent evidence to establish by clear and convincing evidence that there is a
grave risk that the children's return would expose the children to physical or psychological harm
or otherwise place the children in an intolerable situation. Many of the documents relied upon
by Movants contain hearsay. Despite being given the opportunity to present witnesses, Movants
failed to call to the witness stand many of the individuals they now rely upon in their Emergency
Motion. In addition, many of the “facts” they allude to were not raised by the children during the
Court’s in chambers examination. The Court provided the children an opportunity to discuss all
of their concerns. They raised many concerns, but failed to raise many of the allegations
Movants rely upon.
Nevertheless, because the immediate return of the children would effectively hinder any
meaningful appellate review of this case, the Court will stay its Order requiring the minor
children be returned forthwith to the custody of Petitioner.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court’s Order, entered August 3rd, 2012, is hereby
STAYED pending Movants’ appeal of the Order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit.
SIGNED this 3rd day of August, 2012.

XAVIER RODRIGUEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2