Affirming commitment order after failure to rebut support violation
Also stated as: Commitment Order Validity and Modification Procedures
The pages courts cite for it
- Cited for: Affirming commitment order after failure to rebut support violation
- Cited for: Abuse of discretion in issuing commitment orders
Ranked by how often New York courts cite each page. The bar is how citing opinions treated that page (green followed, yellow questioned or limited, red negative); a red or yellow chip is the case’s own overall treatment.
New York opinions citing these pages
- Bianco v. Bruce-Ross, 107 A.D.3d 886 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2013)
- Marra v. Hernandez, 102 A.D.3d 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2013)
- Rodriguez v. Suarez, 93 A.D.3d 730 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2012)
- Cooper v. Robertson, 69 A.D.3d 714 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2010)
- Saintime v. Surin, 40 A.D.3d 1103 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2007)
From the opinions citing the top pages above (up to 400 per page are read), most pages cited first, then newest.
Nearest issues
- 13 opinions
- 10 opinions
- 8 opinions
- 16 opinions
- 37 opinions
- 29 opinions
- 21 opinions
Filed under: Nunc pro; Pro tunc; Orders
Where else it is alive
Opinions per jurisdiction citing these pages. A span that stops early can mean the doctrine was dropped there.
How this is built: each issue is a set of opinion pages that later courts cite for the same proposition, grouped from what the citing courts wrote. Names are machine-written from those citations; read the cases before relying on them. Search case law