Ehsani v. Ehsani’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently July 2013
5 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 474 So. 2d 1374 - Snider v. Snider · 463 So. 2d 932 - Ingram v. Ingram · Snider v. Snider
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.
“Among the purposes of the Uniform Custody Jurisdiction Law are the intents to avoid jurisdictional competition and conflict, to discourage continuing controversies over child custody, to deter abductions and unilateral removals of children undertaken to obtain custody awards, to avoid relitigation of other states’ custody decisions insofar as feasible, to facilitate enforcement of custody decrees of other states, and to promote and expand the exchange of information, mutual assistance, and cooperation between courts of this and other states concerned with the same child. In determining whether Louisiana courts should either decline or exercise jurisdiction under the UCJL, it is crucial that each multifaceted and related component of the Act be construed to promote its general purposes....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mitchell v. Janik
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.