419 Pa. Super. 570 - Boudwin v. Boudwin’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 295 Pa. Super. 169 - Hattoum v. Hattoum · 294 Pa. Super. 285 - Warman v. Warman · 317 Pa. Super. 8 - Tettis v. Boyum · Commonwealth Ex Rel. Zaubi v. Zaubi · 412 Pa. Super. 247 - Merman v. Merman
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Home state, for purposes of the UCCJA, is defined as “the state in which the child immediately preceding the time involved lived with his parents, a parent or a person acting as a parent, or in an institution, for at least six (6) consecutive months ...” 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 5343. The UCCJA definition of home state is used solely to determine whether a specific state can assert jurisdiction under the theory that it is the home state.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Under this section of the Act a court cannot assume jurisdiction unless the child and at least one contestant have a significant connection with the Commonwealth and there is available in Pennsylvania substantial evidence concerning present or future care of the child. Unless these requirements are satisfied there is no authority for a court to take jurisdiction under 42 Pa.C.S. § 5344[ (a)(2) ].”
1 later decision 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.