Yaman v. Yaman’s Empirical Analysis
730 F.3d 1 · 2013
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 11601 (International Child Abduction Remedies Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 11603 · 42 U.S.C. § 11604 · 42 U.S.C. § 11606
Relies on Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Crosby Secretary of Administration and Finance of Massachusetts v. National Foreign Trade Council · Ankenbrandt Lr Sr v. A Richards · Sumitomo Shoji America, Inc. v. Avagliano · Medellin v. Texas
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.
“It would have been a simple matter, if the state parties to the Convention wished to take account of the possibility that an abducting parent might make it difficult for the petitioning parent to discover the child's whereabouts, to run the period 'from the date that the petitioning parent learned [or, could reasonably have learned] of the child's whereabouts'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“If the alleged wrongdoer concealed the child's whereabouts from the custodian necessitating a long search for the child and thereby delayed the commencement of a return proceeding by the applicant, it is highly questionable whether the respondent should be permitted to benefit from such conduct absent strong countervailing considerations”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“consider the abducting parent's misconduct, together with any other relevant circumstances, such as whether return would not be harmful or disruptive even though the child has become settled, in deciding whether to order [his] return.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.