Hanley v. Roy’s Empirical Analysis
485 F.3d 641 · 2007
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 11601 (International Child Abduction Remedies Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 11603
Relies on Friedrich v. Friedrich · Lops v. Lops · Perry A. March, in His Capacity as Father of Samson Leo March and Tzipora Josette March, Both Minor Children, Petitioner-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Lawrence E. Levine Carolyn R. Levine, Respondents-Appellants/cross-Appellees · Furnes v. Reeves
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t is crucial to note that the violation of a single custody right suffices to make removal of a child wrongful. That is, a parent need not have “custody” of the child to be entitled to return of his child under the Convention; rather, he need only have one right of custody. Further, he need not have a sole or even primary right of custody.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Palencia v. Perez · In Re Jjl-P.“[t]he intention of the Convention is to protect all the ways in which custody of children can be exercised, and the Convention favors a flexible interpretation of the terms used, which allows the greatest possible number of cases to be brought into consideration.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Palencia v. Perez · In Re Jjl-P.“to protect children internationally from the harmful effects of their wrongful removal or retention and to establish procedures to ensure their prompt return to the State of their habitual residence.”
2 later decisions 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.