Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 208 S.W.3d 366 - Button v. Waite

Button v. Waite’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
2
states following
August 2009
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 89 Cal. App. 4th 1166 - In Re Nada R. · Orange County Social Services Agency v. Abdulaziz R. · State v. Collins · 25 Kan. App. 2d 754 - In Re Marriage of Anderson · State v. Cawood

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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Exclusive, continuing jurisdiction is not reestablished if, after the child, the parents, and all persons acting as parents leave the State, the non-custodial parent returns. As subsection (b) provides, once a State has lost exclusive, continuing jurisdiction, it can modify its own determination only if it has jurisdiction under the standards of Section 201 [§ 3421]. If another State acquires exclusive continuing jurisdiction under this section, then its orders cannot be modified even if this State has once again become the home State of the child.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.