487 So. 2d 345 - Hamill v. Bower’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently May 2012
22 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 32 Cal. 3d 689 - Kumar v. Superior Court · English v. McCrary · 122 Cal. App. 3d 443 - In Re Marriage of Leonard · 378 So. 2d 812 - Trujillo v. Trujillo · Reeve v. Reeve
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) If a court of another state has made a custody decree, a court of this state shall not modify that decree unless: (a) It appears to the court of this state that the court which rendered the decree does not now have jurisdiction under jurisdictional prerequisites substantially in accordance with this act or has declined to assume jurisdiction to modify the decree; and (b) The court of this state has jurisdiction.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the original decree state retains continuing jurisdiction to modify its decree exclusively unless the two aforementioned statutory conditions are met. To summarize, all modification petitions must be addressed to the state which rendered the decree if that state had and still retains jurisdiction. This is so even though the second state becomes the "home state" for purposes of UCCJA. [Footnote omitted].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“initial jurisdiction is determined by guidelines which look to the state with the closest connections to the child and to information about present and future well-being. However, modification jurisdiction is best viewed as an extension of the recognition and enforcement provisions of the Uniform Act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Yurgel v. Yurgel
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.