Ibrayeva v. Kublan
Virginia Court of Appeals
2012 WL 6114971 (2012)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
Assel Ibrayeva (defendant) came to the United States on a valid visa in 2003. Ibrayeva met Andrei Kublan (plaintiff) when he represented her at a hearing in immigration court in 2007. Ibrayeva asked for voluntary departure, and the immigration court ordered Ibrayeva to leave within 120 days. However, before the 120 days elapsed, Ibrayeva and Kublan married. After the marriage, Kublan filed a petition for alien relative to allow Ibrayeva to remain in the United States. The couple had one child during the marriage. In March 2008 and May 2009, Ibrayeva was arrested for assault and battery against Kublan. In November 2010, the couple learned the petition for alien relative was denied, and Ibrayeva asked for voluntary departure, which was granted in December 2010. In January 2011, Ibrayeva was again arrested for assault and battery against Kublan, and the couple separated. In March 2011, Kublan filed for divorce. In October 2011, the trial court adjudicating the divorce denied Ibrayeva’s motion to set aside the premarital agreement, meaning the equitable-distribution and spousal-support issues were resolved as dictated in the agreement. In December 2011, the trial court entered a custody-and-visitation order, granting Kublan custody and visitation for Ibrayeva. In February 2012, the trial court heard evidence on the grounds for the divorce, namely cruelty by Ibrayeva against Kublan. Ibrayeva objected to a divorce granted on the ground of cruelty because it would likely lead to her deportation. However, the trial court granted a divorce on the ground of cruelty, and Ibrayeva appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.