James A. Sullivan, Jr.

Defended family member of a Hague Convention petitioner in companion litigation alleging that the family member had tortiously interfered with custodial rights. We prevailed before the Supreme Court of Illinois. In a unanimous opinion, the court declined to recognize a cause of action for tortious interference with custodial rights in the State of Illinois, holding that such policy decisions are to be decided by the legislature, and ending four years of litigation.

Represented a London local authority in securing the return of a young child to the United Kingdom under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The team prevailed at trial in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, defended post-trial motions, won affirmance in the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and coordinated U.S. and U.K. government agencies to secure the return.

Defend and prosecute actions involving title disputes with respect to real property located in Washington D.C. and Maryland including issues relating to ownership, lien validity and priority, including cases involving forged deeds, challenges to foreclosure proceedings, easements, improper lis pendens filings, as well as suits to correct deeds and other land records.

Successfully obtained summary judgment in the District of Columbia in favor of lender against the holder of a foreign judgment which claimed that its foreign judgment had priority over the lender’s deed of trust, which would have effectively nullified the lender’s interest in the real property at issue.  The case involved the issue of whether or not the lender was a bona fide purchaser for value or had actual or constructive knowledge of the foreign judgment prior to the loan transaction at issue.  The Court ultimately held that the lender was a bona fide purchaser for value and held no such knowledge of the foreign judgment which would have defeated its bona fide purchaser status.

Successfully defended a lender in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court and on appeal against multiple challenges to the validity of the lender’s right to foreclose on real property. The case involved the issue of whether the lender could properly foreclose under a deed of trust which it had acquired by way of assignment from an originating lender. Challenges to the validity of the assignment were raised by way of exceptions to the foreclosure sale filed by a subsequent lender and a straw purchaser of the property--likely involved in a foreclosure rescue scheme. The Circuit Court rejected those challenges and entered a final order of ratification. A subsequent declaratory judgment action brought by the losing parties in their attempt to raise the same challenges to the lender’s right to foreclose was later dismissed based upon principles of res judicata. The judgments entered in both the foreclosure action and the declaratory judgment action were affirmed by the Court of Special Appeals.

Successfully defended a property owner in a dispute in Queen Anne’s County Circuit Court against multiple neighbors claiming easement rights over client’s property to access beach area on the eastern shore of the Chesapeake Bay.  The case raised the novel issue of whether the neighbors had an implied easement based on a Subdivision Plat recorded in 1952, which the Court ultimately rejected.  The Court also rejected alternative claims made by the neighbors that they held prescriptive easements based upon their prior alleged use of the property at issue.

Represented a lender in a suit by its borrower challenging the validity of a foreclosure sale of property in North Carolina.  The Court dismissed the case under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which bars a federal court from considering issues previously raised and decided in state court.