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.
5 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2014 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 Custody of Petersongreen2 sentences2014In re R.L.S., 218 Ill. 2d at 434-35 (citing In re Custody of Peterson, 112 Ill. 2d 48, 52 (1986)). “ ‘Standing’ in this context refers to a statutory requirement the nonparent must meet before the trial court proceeds to the merits of the petition for custody.” In re Custody of M.C.C., 383 Ill. 2012In re R.L.S., 218 Ill.2d at 434-35, 300 Ill.Dec. 350 , 844 N.E.2d 22 (citing In re Custody of Peterson, 112 Ill.2d 48, 52 , 96 Ill.Dec. 690 , 491 N.E.2d 1150 (1986)). "`Standing' in this context refers to a statutory requirement the nonparent must meet before the trial court proceeds to the merits of the petition for custody." In re Custody of M.C.C., 383 Ill.App.3d 913, 917 , 323 Ill.Dec. 100 , 892 N.E.2d 1092 (2008) (citing In re R.L.S., 218 Ill.2d at 436, 300 Ill.Dec. 350 , 844 N.E.2d 22 ). [1] ¶ 18 Under the facts of this case, William was in the physical custody of Miki who, as an adoptiv | 2 | 5 |
Matthew Miguel C. v. Umergreen2 sentences2014In re R.L.S., 218 Ill. 2d at 434-35 (citing In re Custody of Peterson, 112 Ill. 2d 48, 52 (1986)). “ ‘Standing’ in this context refers to a statutory requirement the nonparent must meet before the trial court proceeds to the merits of the petition for custody.” In re Custody of M.C.C., 383 Ill. 2012In re R.L.S., 218 Ill.2d at 434-35, 300 Ill.Dec. 350 , 844 N.E.2d 22 (citing In re Custody of Peterson, 112 Ill.2d 48, 52 , 96 Ill.Dec. 690 , 491 N.E.2d 1150 (1986)). "`Standing' in this context refers to a statutory requirement the nonparent must meet before the trial court proceeds to the merits of the petition for custody." In re Custody of M.C.C., 383 Ill.App.3d 913, 917 , 323 Ill.Dec. 100 , 892 N.E.2d 1092 (2008) (citing In re R.L.S., 218 Ill.2d at 436, 300 Ill.Dec. 350 , 844 N.E.2d 22 ). [1] ¶ 18 Under the facts of this case, William was in the physical custody of Miki who, as an adoptiv | 2 | 3 |
In Re RLSgreen2 sentences2014In re R.L.S., 218 Ill. 2d at 434-35 (citing In re Custody of Peterson, 112 Ill. 2d 48, 52 (1986)). “ ‘Standing’ in this context refers to a statutory requirement the nonparent must meet before the trial court proceeds to the merits of the petition for custody.” In re Custody of M.C.C., 383 Ill. 2012In re R.L.S., 218 Ill.2d at 434-35, 300 Ill.Dec. 350 , 844 N.E.2d 22 (citing In re Custody of Peterson, 112 Ill.2d 48, 52 , 96 Ill.Dec. 690 , 491 N.E.2d 1150 (1986)). "`Standing' in this context refers to a statutory requirement the nonparent must meet before the trial court proceeds to the merits of the petition for custody." In re Custody of M.C.C., 383 Ill.App.3d 913, 917 , 323 Ill.Dec. 100 , 892 N.E.2d 1092 (2008) (citing In re R.L.S., 218 Ill.2d at 436, 300 Ill.Dec. 350 , 844 N.E.2d 22 ). [1] ¶ 18 Under the facts of this case, William was in the physical custody of Miki who, as an adoptiv | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Custody of MCC
green
1 sentence2012In re R.L.S., 218 Ill.2d at 434-35, 300 Ill.Dec. 350 , 844 N.E.2d 22 (citing In re Custody of Peterson, 112 Ill.2d 48, 52 , 96 Ill.Dec. 690 , 491 N.E.2d 1150 (1986)). "`Standing' in this context refers to a statutory requirement the nonparent must meet before the trial court proceeds to the merits of the petition for custody." In re Custody of M.C.C., 383 Ill.App.3d 913, 917 , 323 Ill.Dec. 100 , 892 N.E.2d 1092 (2008) (citing In re R.L.S., 218 Ill.2d at 436, 300 Ill.Dec. 350 , 844 N.E.2d 22 ). [1] ¶ 18 Under the facts of this case, William was in the physical custody of Miki who, as an adoptiv | 1 | 2012–2012 |
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.