Lozano v. Montoya Alvarez

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that equitable tolling may be appropriate when a person diligently pursues her rights but an “extraordinary circumstance prevents [her] from bringing a timely action”
• holding that a retention is “wrongful” when “it is in breach of rights of custody attributed to a person, . . . either jointly or alone” (alteration in original; quotation marks omitted; quoting Hague Convention, Art. 3
• observing that when the drafters of legislation did not use \obvious alternative\ language, \the natural implication is that they did not intend\ that alternative
• observing that “the [equitable tolling] doctrine effectively extends an otherwise discrete limitations period set by Congress” and, therefore, warrants careful consideration of statutory intent
• explaining that equitable tolling applies “when a litigant has pursued [her] rights diligently but some extraordinary circumstance prevents [her] from bringing a timely action”
• requiring that a “litigant has pursued his rights diligently but some extraordinary circumstance prevents him from bringing a timely action”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).