Excerpted from Khan complained. AzizYesterday, the Louisiana Court docket of Appeals dominated with the opinion of Choose Shannon J. Gremillion and Judges D. Kent Savoie and Candyce G. Perret:
Khan and Azeez are Indian residents who married in India in 2003 however have been dwelling in the USA since 2007. They first lived in Maryland earlier than shifting to Quincy, Illinois in 2017. Of fogeys, one was born in 2005 and the opposite in 2008.
He then uttered the phrase “talaq” (divorce) 3 times and was granted a divorce unilaterally underneath Sharia regulation, a apply that India declared unlawful and unconstitutional on July 31, 2019, retroactively to September 19, 2018. Rights Safety Act). It states that declarations of triple talaq are invalid and unlawful and “any declaration of talaq made by a Muslim husband to his spouse verbally, in writing, electronically or in every other method shall be deemed invalid”. clean Unlawful” and sentenced the husband to 3 years in jail and a high quality. After Aziz lastly returned to the USA in March 2019, he instantly submitted a petition to dissolve the wedding to the Adams County Court docket in Illinois on March 13, 2019.
Khan objects to Illinois court docket jurisdiction, arguing he was divorced via talaq regulation [and that there had been an Indian court judgment acknowledging the divorce -EV] … [T]The Illinois trial court docket rejected Khan’s distinctive discovering that the UCCJEA (Uniform Youngster Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act) and basic ideas of human rights required that Tarlac’s divorce and any subsequent little one custody award be invalid.…
Any divorce proceedings that lead to a judgment, together with custody of the kids, based mostly solely on the husband’s declaration of divorce, violates the elemental precept of the spouse’s proper to contest the divorce proceedings, to be heard relating to the division of belongings and money owed, and the division of property. Custody of Grownup Youngsters. Based on Dr. Khan’s testimony, the one rights conferred by the divorce declaration had been the spouse’s proper to endeavor to reconcile. The Court docket due to this fact refused to grant worldwide software to “Talak” because it utilized to parental accountability/custody of the events’ minor kids. Solely Illinois courts (and never Indian courts) can present full reduction to events as a result of solely Illinois courts have jurisdiction to resolve parenting and custody issues. Based on UCCJEA, Illinois is dwelling for kids.
The Illinois court docket issued a judgment on November 6, 2019, invalidating the Indian judgment, dissolving the wedding, offering for little one custody, and awarding spousal and little one assist in accordance with Illinois regulation….
Khan subsequently tried to re-litigate the matter in Louisiana state court docket, which was denied by the Louisiana Court docket of Trial and Appeals:
Khan argued that each international judgment to which the nation offers full religion and credit score should first endure a full evidentiary listening to to make the judgment “enforceable” [and thus enforceable -EV]. We disagree…
Khan sought full religion and credit score within the Louisiana Indian divorce judgment regardless of the Illinois judgment declaring the judgment invalid and regulating little one custody determinations underneath the UCCJEA. He didn’t attraction the legitimate conviction in Illinois. Furthermore, because the shifting celebration, he additionally bears the burden of proving the correctness of the Indian judgment…. The one query earlier than us, due to this fact, is whether or not the trial court docket erred find that the Illinois judgment was entitled to full religion and credit score.
Illinois courts train jurisdiction over the events pursuant to 750 ILCS 36/201, which authorizes Illinois courts to make preliminary little one custody selections when Illinois is the kid’s state of origin or the kid’s state of origin. The kid is inside 6 months and the mother and father proceed to reside in Illinois. This part particularly supplies for the court docket’s unique and persevering with jurisdiction over little one custody issues. Certainly, Illinois is dwelling to the children and Aziz. Khan challenged the Illinois court docket’s jurisdiction over him in Illinois, asserting the validity of the Indian judgment and didn’t attraction the trial court docket’s resolution. Khan’s second try and validate his Indian judgment in Louisiana was nothing greater than discussion board procuring….
The State of Illinois submits an Illinois judgment to Louisiana Assist Enforcement Providers (LASES) for the aim of registering and implementing the judgment in Louisiana…. On the time, Khan owed $162,716.15. A listening to adopted on March 22, 2023. The trial court docket discovered that the State of Illinois had no jurisdiction over Khan; nonetheless, as a result of Aziz had not acquired discover of the LASES listening to, she was unable to defend Khan’s claims, and the State had no proof to dispute Khan’s assertion that he didn’t Obtain notices about hearings in Illinois. Due to this fact, the trial court docket dominated in Khan’s favor, enjoining the Division of Youngsters and Household Providers from implementing the LASES order. The Division of Youngsters and Household Providers filed a movement in June 2023 to reopen or vacate the order denying and deregistering.
He testified falsely on this matter, a minimum of in connection together with his alleged lack of discover within the Illinois proceedings….
Within the current case, the trial court docket famous its error within the LASES case (which was not consolidated with the current case) and said that it was clear that it was unaware on the time of its ruling that Khan was totally conscious of and concerned within the Illinois sentencing. The court docket of first occasion identified its misguided ruling on the exception to res judicata within the LASES case listening to:
[A]Certainly, this Court docket’s refusal to implement the Illinois order relied on data accessible to this Court docket on the time indicating that Javeed Khan had not acquired discover of the November 5, 2019, listening to. Nevertheless, Javed Khan not solely took word of this listening to, he additionally wrote a letter of apology dated November 1, 2019 earlier than the listening to, through which he expressed his remorse for not attending the listening to on November 5, 2019 apology……. The data offered to the court docket on the LASES case listening to was clearly incomplete. Due to this fact, the court docket’s discovering that Javed Khan was not notified of the listening to on November 5, 2019, was clearly misguided.
… We word that Khan’s conduct in reference to this matter borders on an abuse of the judicial course of, and if he makes one other false allegation that he failed to notice an Illinois listening to that he clearly attended, we are going to discover him responsible of a frivolous attraction And contempt of court docket…
The trial court docket’s resolution granting Aziz an exception to res judicata was
Confirms that Louisiana should give full credit score to Illinois judgments
Dissolve a wedding and supply for custody and alimony.
Douglas L. Bryan (The Bryan Legislation Agency, LLC) represents Azeez; Derek P. Manuel represents the State of Louisiana.
