A Milbank pro bono team successfully appealed a marriage fraud finding on behalf of an immigrant from the Philippines who came to the United States in April 2019, only to see her marriage quickly dissolve after she wed her fiancé in June 2019.
After being wooed during a brief courtship in the Philippines, Vilma B.*, then a 21-year-old woman, emigrated from the Philippines to marry a US citizen in Cortland, New York, but the parties’ relationship quickly deteriorated. After an alleged physical altercation, Vilma B. left the marital residence. Vilma B.’s husband then sued Vilma B. for annulment by fraud, alleging she tricked him into marriage and that her sole reason for marrying him was to obtain entry into the United States. By his own admission, Vilma B.’s husband lured her under false pretenses from her friend’s home to have her detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
After a two-day trial, the Cortland County Supreme Court in January 2020 ruled in favor of Vilma B.’s husband, broadly disregarding Vilma B.’s testimony. The trial court’s finding of fraud relied heavily on inferences drawn from Vilma B’s conduct after the marriage deteriorated—including Vilma B.’s filing of a family offense petition for the abuse she allegedly suffered and Vilma B.’s exploration of her rights under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The trial court found that Vilma B. was not the victim of domestic violence because she had not reported the abuse to authorities when it occurred and inferred from Vilma B.’s efforts after the marriage that she had the “intent to obtain citizenship by any means possible.”
Milbank appealed the judgment to the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department. Sanctuary for Families, Inc. and the New York State Coalition Against Domestic Violence, as amici curiae, filed a brief in support of Vilma B.’s appeal. Milbank associate Jonathan Lamberti argued before the Third Department on August 18, 2021. In a 5-0 decision, the appellate court reversed the trial court’s ruling and dismissed the annulment complaint. In doing so, the appellate court agreed with Milbank’s argument that Vilma B.’s husband did not meet his burden to show that Vilma B. entered the marriage with the sole intent to obtain entry to the United States.
Specifically, it found that there was no evidence of premarital intent to defraud. The appellate court rejected the trial court’s heavy reliance on the belated timing of Vilma B.’s family offense petition and noted that the trial court improperly took a negative inference against Vilma B. for exploring relief under VAWA. It also noted that the trial court improperly excluded photographic evidence submitted by Vilma B. which may have aided her case.
Vilma B. is represented by a Milbank pro bono team consisting of Litigation partner Stacey J. Rappaport and associates Jonathan Lamberti, Sohee Rho, Christopher Almon and Haley Ling.
*Client wishes to remain anonymous.
