KHALIFA V. SHANNON 945 A.2d 1244 (2008) CASE BRIEF

KHALIFA V. SHANNON

945 A.2d 1244 (2008)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Khalifa (D) appealed a jury award of $3,017,500 in compensatory and punitive damages in Shannon's (P) complaint for interference with custody and visitation rights.

FACTS: P married Nermeen Khalifa (D) and they had two sons. P and D separated in January 2000. The Court entered a consent order that granted P custody of Adam; and D custody of Jason. Each parent also had visitation rights with their non-custodial child. On August 18, 2001, Afaf Nassar Khalifa (D) flew to Washington, D.C. from Egypt and stayed with D in her apartment. P agreed that both boys could visit a cousin in Brooklyn, New York with Ds as long as the boys were returned to him by Sunday night, August 26, 2001. The boys were not returned. Ds had previously and calculatedly arranged to put the boys on an airplane to Egypt. P has not seen his American sons since August 2001. Afaf Nassar Khalifa (D) was extradited to Maryland and was sentenced to a ten-year prison term. That sentence was later revised to a three-year sentence. D has filed a suit for intentional interference with custody and visitation. Ds moved to dismiss the Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction and insufficiency of service of process, which the court denied. After numerous attempts to serve D, the court ordered alternate service by mail and by publication in The Cairo Times. D moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, insufficiency of service of process, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, which the trial court denied. The jury awarded P $17,500 in attorney fees and costs; $500,000 in compensatory damages against each defendant; $900,000 in punitive damages against Afaf Nassar Khalifa and $1,100,000 million in punitive damages against Nermeen Khalifa Shannon. Ds moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, a new trial, and for remittitur, arguing grossly excessive damages, all of which the Circuit Court denied. Ds noted their appeal to the Court of the Special Appeals, and this court issued a writ of certiorari prior to any proceedings in the intermediate appellate court.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner