Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2013 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Illinois courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In Re Marriage of Thompson and Thompsongreen2 sentences1996See Thompson, 272 Ill.App.3d 257 , 209 Ill.Dec. 294 , 651 N.E.2d 222 (rebuttable presumption in favor of parent under section 601(b)(2) of the Dissolution Act); Barnhart, 232 Ill.App.3d 317 , 174 Ill.Dec. 26 , 597 N.E.2d 1238 (presumption in favor of parent in Probate Act). 1996See Thompson, 272 Ill.App.3d 257 , 209 Ill.Dec. 294 , 651 N.E.2d 222 (rebuttable presumption in favor of parent under section 601(b)(2) of the Dissolution Act); Barnhart, 232 Ill.App.3d 317 , 174 Ill.Dec. 26 , 597 N.E.2d 1238 (presumption in favor of parent in Probate Act). | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Starr v. Barnhart
green
2 sentences1996See Thompson, 272 Ill.App.3d 257 , 209 Ill.Dec. 294 , 651 N.E.2d 222 (rebuttable presumption in favor of parent under section 601(b)(2) of the Dissolution Act); Barnhart, 232 Ill.App.3d 317 , 174 Ill.Dec. 26 , 597 N.E.2d 1238 (presumption in favor of parent in Probate Act). 1996See Thompson, 272 Ill.App.3d 257 , 209 Ill.Dec. 294 , 651 N.E.2d 222 (rebuttable presumption in favor of parent under section 601(b)(2) of the Dissolution Act); Barnhart, 232 Ill.App.3d 317 , 174 Ill.Dec. 26 , 597 N.E.2d 1238 (presumption in favor of parent in Probate Act). | 2 | 1996–1996 |
Matthew Miguel C. v. Umer
green
1 sentence2013To establish that the child is not in the physical custody of one of his parents within the meaning of section 601(b)(2), the nonparent must show that the parents no longer have physical custody of the child because the parents “voluntarily and indefinitely relinquished custody of the child.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) M.C.C., 383 Ill. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
In Re Marriage of Roberts
green
1 sentence1996App. 3d 972 , 649 N.E.2d 1344 , the fourth district considered the question of whether a man whose presumption of paternity has been rebutted may seek custody as a parent under section 601. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Petition of Kirchner
yellow
2 sentences1995The majority's conclusion that the Does have "even less authority" to seek standing than headmasters and camp directors is patently absurd. 164 Ill.2d at 492 , 208 Ill.Dec. at 279 , 649 N.E.2d at 335 . 1995The majority's conclusion that the Does have "even less authority" to seek standing than headmasters and camp directors is patently absurd. 164 Ill.2d at 492 , 208 Ill.Dec. at 279 , 649 N.E.2d at 335 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
In Re Marriage of Santa Cruz
green
2 sentences1989In re Marriage of Santa Cruz (1988), 172 Ill. 1989In re Marriage of Santa Cruz (1988), 172 Ill. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
In Re Custody of McCuan
green
1 sentence1989It has been held that the overnight visit by a child to a third party and that party's refusal to return the child to its custodial parent *1049 did not deprive that parent of "physical custody" as that term is used in section 601(b)(2) so as to create standing of the nonparent, third party, to seek custody of the child under the Dissolution Act. ( In re Custody of McCuan (1988), 176 Ill. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
In Re Custody of O'Rourke
green
2 sentences1989App. 3d 584 , 514 N.E.2d 6 .) From these cases, we concluded that a determination of whether a child was “not in the physical custody” of one of his parents under the language of section 601(b)(2) so as to confer standing on a nonparent to seek custody depended upon a consideration of various factors, including who was in physical possession of the child, how that person got possession as well as the duration and nature of the physical possession. 1989App.3d 584 , 514 N.E.2d 6 .) From these cases, we concluded that a determination of whether a child was "not in the physical custody" of one of his parents under the language of section 601(b)(2) so as to confer standing on a nonparent to seek custody depended upon a consideration of various factors, including who was in physical possession of the child, how that person got possession as well as the duration and nature of the physical possession. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Marriage of Nicholas v. Nicholas
green
2 sentences1989App. 3d 171, 178 , 524 N.E.2d 728, 733 .) Since no one factor is controlling in the determination of whether a child is not in the physical custody of one of his parents under section 601(b)(2), such a determination in a given case will depend heavily on the particular facts of the individual case. 1989App.3d 171, 178 , 524 N.E.2d 728, 733 .) Since no one factor is controlling in the determination of whether a child is not in the physical custody of one of his parents under section 601(b)(2), such a determination in a given case will depend heavily on the particular facts of the individual case. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.