Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**  (Read 89642 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline ssmom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 35
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #435 on: December 22, 2009, 09:06:23 PM »
Quote from: BrazilianForJustice;56597
No speculation in this thread, please. Where did you see the word immediate?


Check post #350 and #354 in this thread.  I read it here.

Offline NormalMom

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #436 on: December 22, 2009, 09:07:47 PM »
Quote from: BrazilianForJustice;56597
No speculation in this thread, please. Where did you see the word immediate?
 Post # 354 in this thread, by Pepe:
in the portion numbered 6), is the term "imediato".
I'm sorry I don't know how to post the quoted portion.

Offline André Felipe

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #437 on: December 22, 2009, 09:13:04 PM »
Quote from: NormalMom;56608
Post # 354 in this thread, by Pepe:
in the portion numbered 6), is the term "imediato".
I'm sorry I don't know how to post the quoted portion.

Gilmar Mendes used the word "imediato/imediatamente" I belive five or six times, but any of them were used to mean that Sean should return immediately, from now.

Offline BrazilianForJustice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1158
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #438 on: December 22, 2009, 09:15:21 PM »
Quote from: André Felipe;56614
Gilmar Mendes used the word "imediato/imediatamente" I belive five or six times, but any of them were used to mean that Sean, from now, should return immediately.
He was referring to the original decision that determined immediate return. That is not the same as saying that HIS decision required an immediate return. His decision was to uphold a previous decision, not to establish the terms of the return. Correct?

Offline jtlund

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 14
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #439 on: December 22, 2009, 09:19:04 PM »
I'm a family law legal assistant here in MN and am curious:
 
Is there any point in the process there that they would be held in our equivalent of contempt or failure to comply?

Offline André Felipe

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #440 on: December 22, 2009, 09:20:35 PM »
Quote from: BrazilianForJustice;56617
He was referring to the original decision that determined immediate return. That is not the same as saying that HIS decision required an immediate return. His decision was to uphold a previous decision, not to establish the terms of the return. Correct?

It uphold TRF's previous decision, which ordered the return within 48 hours. But we don't know if it means that they have another 48 hours period, or if the clock continues from the point that Marco Aurelio issued his decision, which would give +- 24 hours for the brazilian family.

Offline doleary

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 34
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #441 on: December 22, 2009, 09:24:12 PM »
Quote from: jtlund;56624
I'm a family law legal assistant here in MN and am curious:
 
Is there any point in the process there that they would be held in our equivalent of contempt or failure to comply?
At the point were the time frame has been exhausted. The return was 48 hours so it would be after that or shorter if they include the time from the ruling to the time that the stay was put in place. Kind of like a stopwatch. However, Anything can happen it is Brazil after all.

Offline NormalMom

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #442 on: December 22, 2009, 09:26:17 PM »
Quote from: André Felipe;56627
It uphold TRF's previous decision, which ordered the return within 48 hours. But we don't know if it means that they have another 48 hours period, or if the clock continues from the point that Marco Aurelio issued his decision, which would give +- 24 hours for the brazilian family.

I have no understanding of why the Chief Justice would neglect to address that, of course, but does anyone know of precedence for instances like this?

Offline AnotherDad

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 748
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #443 on: December 22, 2009, 09:27:24 PM »
Quote from: André Felipe;56627
It uphold TRF's previous decision, which ordered the return within 48 hours. But we don't know if it means that they have another 48 hours period, or if the clock continues from the point that Marco Aurelio issued his decision, which would give +- 24 hours for the brazilian family.

Couldn't Tostes try to argue over the handover so it would drag out long enough for him to try something else, meanwhile moving Sean around?
 
Also, if Granny absconds with Sean, can't LeS just say he didn't know, and Tostes say he isn't responsible for his client's behavior?

Offline André Felipe

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #444 on: December 22, 2009, 09:28:32 PM »
Quote from: NormalMom;56634
I have no understanding of why the Chief Justice would neglect to address that, of course, but does anyone know of precedence for instances like this?

He couldn't. He is just authorized to decide whether on to maintain Marco Aurelio's decision, or to restore TRF's decision.
He could not give new orders.

Offline André Felipe

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #445 on: December 22, 2009, 09:33:32 PM »
Quote from: AnotherDad;56636
Couldn't Tostes try to argue over the handover so it would drag out long enough for him to try something else, meanwhile moving Sean around?
I didn't understand this question. Handover???
As I said before, in this thread, somewhere behind, they still can appeal to STJ, this time, using the "normal" procedures, against TRF's decision. They can not use Habeas Corpus for that anymore.
 
Also, if Granny absconds with Sean, can't LeS just say he didn't know, and Tostes say he isn't responsible for his client's behavior?
Tostes indeed is not responsible for his client's behavior, but his clients can go to jail if they do this.

Offline NormalMom

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #446 on: December 22, 2009, 09:34:04 PM »
Quote from: André Felipe;56637
He couldn't. He is just authorized to decide whether on to maintain Marco Aurelio's decision, or to restore TRF's decision.
He could not give new orders.

Thank you, I understand.
Is there precedence from any cases similar to this, either foreign or domestic rulings at that judicial level?

Offline AnotherDad

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 748
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #447 on: December 22, 2009, 09:35:08 PM »
Handover = transfer of possession

Offline Bob D'Amico

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1489
    • Bring Sean Home Foundation
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #448 on: December 22, 2009, 09:36:58 PM »
Would you men and ladies please move this discussion to the Chatting thread or start a new one before Chuckles gets back and ...... :beatin:
Bob D'Amico

Offline doleary

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 34
Re: STF DECISION EXPECTED TODAY 12/22 *NO CHATTING-DECISION UPDATES ONLY!**
« Reply #449 on: December 22, 2009, 09:37:22 PM »
They have to turn Sean over to the US Embassy.  The time frame for that turn over is 48 hours from the time of the ruling minus any time that has already been comsumed if that is how Brazil's law work. Or it could be a restart of the 48 hours which would be Thursday night for me since I live in Kansas. I am overjoyed for David and I know that he is under a great emotional stain waiting to hold Sean again.