The state Supreme Court recently got a lesson in Islamic divorce, specifically that part that says a man can divorce his wife by saying to her three times, "I divorce you." But don't get any ideas. In a decision handed down Valentine's Day, the justices upheld the American way.

The case before the court involved the divorce of Sonia and Samer Ramadan of Newfields. The couple married in Tripoli, Lebanon, in 1986; their wedding included a deferred "dower" of 250,000 Lebanese liras.

Samer Ramadan brought his new wife to Massachusetts, where he was living, and over the next several years, the couple moved between the United States, Lebanon and Egypt before settling down in New Hampshire in 1999. Four years after their arrival here, the marriage had broken down in Sonia Ramadan's eyes, and on Oct. 14, 2003, she went to the Rockingham County Superior Court and filed for divorce.

Her husband protested and told the judge that Sonia Ramadan was not only a day too late - but in the wrong country.

Samer Ramadan argued that he had, in fact, initiated their divorce the day before by telling his wife three times in succession the words, "I divorce you." He took care of the other Islamic requirement, which requires two witnesses, by calling an attorney in Lebanon and declaring within earshot of the witnesses that he had divorced his wife.

A few day after that, Samer Ramadan flew to Lebanon to see his attorney and "sign the necessary papers," according to court records. He returned to the United States with those papers in December, upset to find the Rockingham County Superior Court had already accepted his wife's filing.

Samer Ramadan insisted the judge dismiss the petition, saying the court had no jurisdiction over a marriage made in Lebanon. The judge refused. Samer Ramadan lost again when he tried to fight the court's decision to award custody of their children to Sonia Ramadan and require him to pay her child support and alimony.

The judge required one more thing, at least temporarily: Samer Ramadan could not refer to his wife in front of their children as a "Muslim or Muslim woman," according to court records.

Having lost his fight in Rockingham County, Samer Ramadan returned to Lebanon, and, through is lawyer, told the court he was ignoring its orders because it had no jurisdiction over him. When Samer Ramadan didn't show for the final hearing, the superior court judge awarded Sonia Ramadan what she asked for, which included most of the couple's assets.

At some point, Samer Ramadan did decide to participate again in the legal process, and he hired a lawyer to appeal his divorce order to the state Supreme Court. Portsmouth attorney Timothy Coughlin argued the case on Samer Ramadan's behalf in January, raising many of the same jurisdictional issues Samer Ramadan had already raised.

But he didn't get any further than Samer Ramadan. "The Supreme Court wasn't buying what I was selling," Coughlin told the Portsmouth Herald this week.

On Valentine's Day, the court upheld the trial court judge and ruled that state courts have jurisdiction over divorces in this state, whether or not the couple was married elsewhere. The justices didn't mince words, either, in telling Samer Ramadan that he had brought this on himself.

"(Samer) deliberately ignored the trial court's orders, failed to answer interrogatories, refused to participate in discovery, declined to submit a proposed permanent divorce decree to the trial court, and did not appear for the final hearing," the ruling said.

"(Samer) cannot now, on appeal, challenge the precise outcome that he could have prevented," the justices continued.

The Herald asked Coughlin how Samer Ramadan had taken the court's order. He didn't know. Last Coughlin had heard, Samer Ramadan was on a pilgrimage to Mecca.

------ End of article

Single page