Kitam v. Titti Moussi

Background

Elisabeth Sobeh Kitam, described in the opinion as a French citizen residing in Canada, filed a verified complaint against her estranged husband, Christian Titti Moussi. She alleged that Moussi had retained custody of their child, N.M.E., in Alameda, California, in violation of a French custody order. Kitam alleged that Moussi had abducted the child and sought the child’s return to Canada under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, as implemented in the United States by the International Child Abduction Remedies Act.

Kitam filed an emergency application for a temporary restraining order, or TRO, without giving Moussi advance notice. She asked the court to bar removal of N.M.E. from California, issue a warrant for immediate physical custody, and deliver the child to her. Kitam said she had not notified Moussi because she believed he might flee with N.M.E. to Cameroon, where he was said to have family.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that the International Child Abduction Remedies Act requires notice to the respondent and that emergency orders issued without notice are limited to circumstances in which specific facts show that immediate and irreparable harm will occur before the other side can be heard. The court found that Kitam’s evidence did not meet that standard.

The court characterized Kitam’s concerns about Moussi’s possible flight as speculative and conclusory. The record did not show that Moussi was preparing to leave Alameda, California. The court also noted evidence suggesting that Moussi intended to remain in the United States and enroll N.M.E. in school there. The allegation that Moussi had attempted to abduct N.M.E. in 2017 was not supported by judicial or law-enforcement records.

Order

The court declined to grant the requested relief without notice, but it granted a limited TRO to preserve the situation while the case proceeded on an expedited basis. Pending further order, Kitam, Moussi, and anyone acting together with or at the direction of either party who knew of the order could not remove N.M.E. from the geographic boundaries of the Northern District of California without the court’s prior permission. The TRO application was denied in all other respects.

The court set a status conference for January 6, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 11 of the San Francisco courthouse. It directed Kitam to serve Moussi with the order and all documents filed on the electronic docket by December 23, 2021, and to file proof of service before the conference. The parties were directed to file a joint status conference statement by December 28, 2021.