CASES OF INTEREST click here to go back to the Cases of Interest       FAMILY LAW: COMITY ISSUES   Issue: Ex Parte Foreign Divorce/ Domicile/ Mehr   Issue: Comity / Foreign Judgment of divorce by talak     Issue: Ex Parte Foreign Divorce/ Domicile/ Mehr Tarik Farag, Appellant, v. Sahar Farag, Respondent. SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT 4 A.D.3d 502; 772 N.Y.S.2d 368; 2004 N.Y. App. Div. Q. Is a US court required to recognize a foreign divorce decree pursuant to the concept of comity? A. As a general rule, comity may be extended to uphold the validity of a foreign divorce decree absent a showing of fraud in its procurement or that recognition of the judgment would do violence to some strong public policy of the state. Plaintiff appealed the trial court's rejection of his Egyptian divorce decree and his argument that the Egyptian "Marriage Deed" governed the equitable distribution of the parties' marital assets and his maintenance obligations pursuant to the legal concept of comity. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal: A foreign divorce decree obtained on the ex parte petition of a spouse present but not domiciled in the foreign country will not be recognized in New York where the other nonresident spouse does not appear and is not served with process. back to the top     Issue: Comity / Foreign Judgment of divorce by talak IRFAN ALEEM v. FARAH ALEEM COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND 2007 Md. App. September 10, 2007. Q. Did the US court err in declining to apply, under principles of comity, the law of Pakistan in determining Wife's rights in marital property titled in Husband's name? A. No. The aspect of Pakistani law under which rights in property follow title, unless altered by marriage contract, will be denied comity, as contrary to Maryland public policy. The parties are Pakistani nationals. The appellee wife is a resident alien and a permanent resident of Maryland. The parties' children are US citizens. During the pendency of the Wife's 2004 divorce action in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Husband divorced Wife by talaq at the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, D.C. He had the Wife served with the "Divorce Decree [Deed]," a check for $ 2,500(representing the deferred mehr stated in the nikahnama), his letter concerning notice under § 7.1 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (Pakistan) 1961, and a letter from the Chairman, Arbitration Council, Cantonment Board Clifton, Karachi, stating that the parties were Pakistani citizens who had been married in Pakistan, so that his "Union Council" had jurisdiction. The circuit court entered a judgment granting Wife an absolute divorce, in June , 2006, spousal support, and an equitable division of Husband's pension. The court declined to enforce the Pakistani divorce as a bar to the equitable division: 1. Wife, who seeks the equitable relief, is now a permanent resident of the United States, in Maryland, which is her domicile. 2. Wife objected to personal jurisdiction claimed by the Cantonment Board. 3. The conflict in marital property rights between Pakistani and Maryland law is so substantial that applying Pakistani law would be contrary to Maryland public policy that when a marriage is dissolved the property interests of the spouses should be adjusted fairly and equitably. back to the top