Case Explained: Non-Argument Calendar WILLIAM MENDOZA BERG v. SOCORRO DEL CARMEN POLANCO SANDOVAL

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Filed: 2026-07-27 Docket: 6:26-cv-00711-PGB-NWH The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s order granting a petition for the return of a minor child to Norway under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, as implemented by the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA). The court held that the father established a prima facie case of wrongful retention because the child habitually resided in Norway, the father had exercised parental rights, and there was credible evidence he did not consent to the mother’s removal of the child to the United States. The court applied clear error review to factual findings and de novo review to legal conclusions, specifically regarding the “grave risk” affirmative defense under Article 13(b) of the Convention (22 U.S.C. § 9003(e)(2)(A)). The appellate court rejected the mother’s arguments that repatriation posed a grave risk of harm, noting that Norway provides comprehensive support for children with special needs and that the loss of specific educational accommodations in Florida does not constitute a grave risk under the Convention. The court further ruled that the district court properly excluded an out-of-court clinical evaluation report as inadmissible hearsay since the expert did not testify, thereby avoiding any need for a *Daubert* analysis. Additionally, the court found no clear error in the district court’s credibility determinations regarding the father’s cessation of video calls and his lack of consent to the relocation, emphasizing that appellate courts must defer to the trial court’s opportunity to judge witness credibility. The court also determined that the return order did not violate international comity because it addressed custody jurisdiction under the Hague Convention rather than conflicting with a temporary Norwegian custody ruling. The practical consequence is that the minor child remains subject to the district court’s order directing his return to the Kingdom of Norway, and all pending motions for stays or reconsideration are denied as moot. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.