658 So. 2d 331 - Hampton v. JAL’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently October 2018
16 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
Applies 25 U.S.C. § 1901 (§ 2 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1902 (§ 3 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1903 (§ 4 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1911 (§ 101 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1912 (§ 102 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1913 (§ 103 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1916 (§ 106 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978)
Relies on Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Bruch · Freytag v. Commissioner · Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield · United States v. Price · In Re the Adoption of Baby Boy L.
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) The Legislature finds and declares the following: [І] (1) There is no resource that is more vital to the continued existence and integrity of Indian tribes than their children, and the State of California has an interest in protecting Indian children who are members of, or are eligible for membership in, an Indian tribe. [І] (2) It is in the interest of an Indian child that the child's membership in the child's Indian tribe and connection to the tribal community be encouraged and protected. [І] (b) In all Indian custody proceedings, as defined in the federal Indian Child Welfare Act ( 25 U.S.C. Sec. 1901 et seq.), the court shall consider all of the findings contained in subdivision (a), strive to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families, comply with the federal Indian Child Welfare Act, and seek to protect the best interest of the child. [IT] (c) A determination by an Indian tribe that an unmarried person who is under the age of 18 years, is either (1) a member of an Indian tribe or (2) eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and a biological child of a member of an Indian tribe shall constitute a significant political affiliation with the tribe and shall require the application of the federal Indian Child Welfare Act to the proceedings.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[n]either [the mother] nor her family has ever lived on the ... reservation in Oklahoma and there are no plans to relocate the family.... [The father] has no ties to any Indian tribe or community and opposes [the child's] removal from his adoptive parents. Moreover, there is no allegation by [the mother] or the [tribe] that, if custody were returned to [the mother], [the child] would grow up in an Indian environment. To the contrary, [the mother] has shown no substantive interest in her Indian heritage in the past and has given no indication this will change in the future.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“to protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families by the establishment of minimum Federal standards for the removal of Indian children from their families and the placement of such children in foster or adoptive homes which will reflect the unique values of Indian culture, and by providing for assistance to Indian tribes in the operation of child and family service programs.”
1 later decision 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.