Virginia E. E. v. Alberto S. P.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Jurisdiction to make custody determination. — (a) A court of this state which is competent to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or modification decree if: (1) This state (A) is the home state of the child at the time of commencement of the proceeding, or (B) had been the child’s home state within six (6) months before commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from this state because of the child’s removal or retention by a person claiming custody or for other reasons, and a parent or person acting as parent continues to live in this state; or (2)(A) It appears that no state has jurisdiction under subsection (a), or each state with jurisdiction under subsection (a) 5 has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this state is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child; and (B) The child and at least one contestant have a significant connection with this state; and (C) There is available in this state substantial evidence concerning the child’s present or future care, protection, training and personal relationships; and (D) It is in the best interest of the child that a court of this state assume jurisdiction; or (3) It appears that no state has jurisdiction under subsections (a) or (b) or each such state has refused jurisdiction on the ground that this is the more appropriate forum to determine child custody, and it is in the best interest of the child that a court of thi”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Voninski v. Voninski

2. “Full faith and credit given to child custody determinations (a) The appropriate authorities of every State shall enforce according to its terms, and shall not modify except as provided in subsection (f) of this section, any child custody determination made consistently with the provisions of this section by a court of another State. (b) As used in this section, the term— ****** (4) “home State” means the State in which, immediately preceding the time involved, the child lived with his parents, a parent, or a person acting as a parent, for at least six consecutive months, .. . Periods of temporary absence of any such persons are counted as part of the six-month or other period. ****** (e) A child custody determination made by a court of a State is consistent with the provisions of this section only if— (1) such court has jurisdiction under the law of such state; and (2) one of the following conditions is met: (A) such State (i) is the home State of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or (ii) had been the child’s home State within six months before the date of the commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from such State because of his removal or retention by a contestant or for other reasons, and a contestant continues to live in such State; (B)(i) it appears that no other State would have jurisdiction under subpara-graph (A), and (ii) it is in the best interests of the child that a court of such State assume jurisdiction because (I) the c”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Voninski v. Voninski

3. “(b) it is in the best interest of the child that a court of this state assume jurisdiction because (i) the child and his parents, or the child and at least one contestant, have a significant connection with this state, and (ii) there is within the jurisdiction of the court substantial evidence concerning the child’s present or future care, protection, training, and personal relationships;”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Voninski v. Voninski