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.
4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 13 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from In re B.B..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In re B.B. Anchor | green | “will not reverse a trial court's custody determination unless it (1) is against the manifest weight of the evidence, (2) is manifestly unjust, or (3) results from a clear abuse of discretion.” | 4 |
| 2 | In Re Custody of Sussenbach | green | “adjustment to his or her home, school, and community.” | 3 |
| 3 | In re: Marriage of Samardzija | green | “a more compelling reason than simply avoiding inconvenience to the noncustodial parent.” | 3 |
| 4 | Walters v. Rodriguez | green | “is entitled to have the issues on appeal clearly defined with pertinent authority cited and a cohesive legal argument presented” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.