McCOMB v. WAMBAUGH

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “the [ICPC] does not apply when a child is returned by the sending state to a natural parent residing in another state”
• holding that the ICPC does not apply to parental placements because they do not constitute “substitutes to parental care”
• concluding that “the [ICPC] does not apply when a child is returned by the sending state to a natural parent residing in another state”
• concluding that a compact that did not receive Congressional consent “must be construed as state law”
• concluding that a compact that did not receive Congressional consent “must be construed as state law”
• the ICPC does not apply to a child returning to a natural parent who resides in a different state, in part, because as the statutory language of Article III is unambiguous

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).