Neergaard-Colón v. Neergaard’s Empirical Analysis
752 F.3d 526 · 2014
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 11601 (International Child Abduction Remedies Act)
Relies on Abbott v. Abbott · Feder v. Evans-Feder · Mozes v. Mozes · Gitter v. Gitter · Holder v. Holder
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Notably, an order of return pursuant to the Hague Convention is not a final determination of custody rights. It simply ensures that custodial decisions will be made by the courts of the children's country of habitual residence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vieira v. De Souza“the problem of international child abductions during domestic disputes. It . . . provid[es] for the prompt return of children wrongfully removed to or retained in any Contracting State.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vieira v. De Souza“) and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vieira v. De Souza
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.