Lozano v. Alvarez’s Empirical Analysis
697 F.3d 41 · 2012
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 11603
Relies on Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Smith v. United States · Sumitomo Shoji America, Inc. v. Avagliano · Medellin v. Texas · Holloway v. United States
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the age of the child; (2) the stability of the child’s residence in the new environment; (3) whether the child attends school or day care consistently; (4) whether the child attends church [or participates in other community or extracurricular school activities] regularly; (5) the respondent’s employment and financial stability; (6) whether the child has friends and relatives in the new area; and (7) the immigration status of the child and the respondent.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“where the proceedings have been commenced after the expiration of the period of one year [from the date of the wrongful removal], shall also order the return of the child, unless it is demonstrated that the child is now settled in its new environment.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'settled' should be viewed to mean that the child has significant emotional and physical connections demonstrating security, stability, and permanence in its new environment.”
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.