296 F. Supp. 2d 1009 - Ly v. Heu’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 11603 · 42 U.S.C. § 11604
Relies on 30 F. Supp. 2d 857 - Bromley v. Bromley · 121 F. Supp. 2d 1118 - Teijeiro Fernandez v. Yeager · 262 F. Supp. 2d 687 - Wiggill v. Janicki
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.
“[tjhere is ... reason to doubt that the Convention provides a judicial remedy for violations of a parent’s visitation rights. Article 12 of the Convention, which addresses procedures to effectuate the return of a wrongfully removed child, specifically refers to action by the “judicial or administrative authority” of a member nation. See Hague Convention, art. 12. In contrast, Article 21 of the Convention, which deals with “organizing or securing the effective exercise of rights of access” to a child, makes no mention of recourse to a judicial authority. Hague Convention, art. 21. Rather, a parent must apply to the “Central Authorit[y]” of a nation to secure enforcement of his or her rights of access.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cantor v. Cohen
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.