Attorneys grateful for clients reprieves from harsh immigration decisions.

Byline: Kris Olson

While aggressive enforcement has kept attorneys who handle immigration matters busy, a couple of Massachusetts lawyers have recently been able to achieve good results for their clients in cases that they believe may help others facing similar issues.

In one case, Joao and Herica Sena went into Norfolk Probate & Family Court to request that their marriage be affirmed, as sanctioned by G.L.c. 207, 14.

The petition was prompted by adverse decisions by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on Joao's petition to classify Herica as the spouse of a U.S. citizen and Herica's application for permanent residence and to adjust her status.

USCIS had decided that Joao and Herica had not been lawfully married because Herica's divorce from her prior spouse was invalid.

The Senas' attorney, Peter Cole of Brighton, says this is not the first time he has seen USCIS deny a petition for a green card on such a basis.

Herica had married Reginaldo Jose Merlim on April 24, 2004. When their marriage broke down and they decided to divorce four years later, both were living in the United States without lawful immigration authority, and their legal domicile was still Brazil. They secured their divorce decree on Nov. 24, 2008, using proxies with powers of attorney, an arrangement that Brazil recognizes.

In USCIS' view, however, at least one if not both parties physically had to be present in Brazil for the divorce to be valid.

On Oct. 18, Judge George F. Phelan "respectfully disagreed" with that assessment.

Phelan wrote that he was aware of circumstances in which "a litigant, surreptitiously or for nefarious purposes contrary to public policy, obtains a quickie divorce in a foreign country without the knowledge or consent of the other spouse, an outcome undeniably against public policy."

But he concluded that the Senas' situation was "not analogous."

Massachusetts recognizes divorces granted in foreign countries by way of reciprocity and under the general concept of comity. None of the traditional reasons like fraud not to apply comity were present in the Senas' case, Phelan wrote.

The judge added that Joao Sena was an "innocent party" who had married Herica on July 7, 2017, relying on the validity of the Brazilian divorce.

"In conclusion, the Court finds that both petitioners went by the book for divorce and marriage and their marriage deserves to be and is recognized by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts," Phelan found. "The divorce was...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT