Remember the Supreme Court refused to review this case, thus the decision of the Supreme Court is meaningless, but if you want to look at the actual Decision of the Virginia Supreme Court, here it is. The decision has nothing to do with DOMA, but what we lawyers call Res Judicata.
The Virginia Supreme Court Case:
http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opnscvwp/1070933.pdfIf you read it, the holding is quite clear, it is strictly one of Civil Procedure. Janet Miller and Lisa Miller had lived together and agreed to have a child. When Lisa later asked Vermont to dissolved the Civil Union, Vermont did so and gave Custody of the Child to Lisa, the birth mother, while Janet Miller was given Visitation. Lisa then moved to Virginia and filed for sole custody of the Child. The trial court granted her custody but on appeal to the Virginia Court of Appeals, that Court reversed the trial court and told it to enforce the Vermont Custody Order for to do otherwise would violate the Federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act,28 U.S.C.§ 1738A. Lisa tried to Appeal, but failed to follow the correct procedure to get in front of the Virginia Supreme Court and the appeal was denied do to failing to properly file the appeal (I.e. did not follow the correct procedure to get in front of the Virginia Supreme Court).
Janet then attempted to enter the Vermont Order in Virginia. Lisa objected to the entrance of the Vermont C&V Order do to DOMA. Lisa objected to this, lost at trial court, filed an appeal with the Virginia Court of Appeals, lost on her appeal, then filed for review by the Virginia Supreme Court. The court then ruled that since she had failed to perfect her former appeal, the holding of the case was final and could NOT be brought up again in a similar action between the same parties (What we attorneys call Res Judicata, but Virgina law calls "Law of the case" and cited so by the Virginia Supreme Court).
Yes, the birth mother LOST do to a Civil Procedure ruling, NOT the merit of the Case, in fact one judge wrote a concurring opinion stating that based on the facts of the case, he could have ruled in the Birth Mother's favor had the ORIGINAL case been properly appealed. He then again points out that this case was NOT that case, and the court MUST follow the "Rule of the Case" when it comes to disputes already decided in a previous action between the same parties. An interesting Res Judicata case, with DOMA and Federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act bring mentioned, but not discussed. The issue in front of the Court in this case was had this dispute been decided previously and all appeals from that decision been taken or waived? The court ruled it had been, the parties were the same and the subject matter was the same, thus it was Res Judicata, the court MUST follow the previous holding on this same matter between these same parties.
Being a Res Judicata Case, no wonder the Supreme Court did not take up this case. Civil Procedure can be interesting, but in this case the people pushing DOMA as the issue would have been sorely disappointed no matter what the US Supreme Court ruled on the issue of Res Judicata.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
