Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 283 Pa. Super. 109 - Joseph E. H. v. Jane E. H.

283 Pa. Super. 109 - Joseph E. H. v. Jane E. H.’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
5
states following
January 1997
most recently cited

16 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 268 Pa. Super. 217 - Garrity v. Garrity · 261 Pa. Super. 1 - Trefsgar v. Trefsgar · 252 Pa. Super. 95 - Commonwealth Ex Rel. Schwarz v. Schwarz · 278 Pa. Super. 446 - Matter of DLS · 261 Pa. Super. 384 - In Re Custody of Sagan

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

  1. “(a) General rule.—A court which has jurisdiction under this subchapter to make an initial or modification decree may decline to exercise its jurisdiction any time before making a decree if it finds that it is an inconvenient forum to make a custody determination under the circumstances of the case and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum. (c) Factors to be considered.—In determining if it is an inconvenient forum, the court shall consider if it is in the interest of the child that another state assume jurisdiction. For this purpose it may take into account the following factors, among others: (1) If another state is or recently was the home state of the child. (2) If another state has a closer connection with the child and his family or with the child and one or more of the contestants. (3) If substantial evidence concerning the present or future care, protection, training, and personal relationships of the child is more readily available in another state. (4) If the parties have agreed on another forum which is no less appropriate. (5) If the exercise of jurisdiction by a court of this Commonwealth would contravene any of the purposes stated in section 5342 (relating to purposes and construction of subchapter).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.