Mendoza v. Miranda

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the “length and stability of the child’s residence in the new environment” is “ordinarily the most important” factor in the “settled” analysis
• listing factors to consider in the settled analysis, and specifically applying whether the children have relatives in the new environment
• explaining that the two tests are “analogous”
• “We decline to remand the case to the District Court for a discretionary determination under Article 18 as to whether Brianna should be returned to Mexico.”
• “[W]e review the district court’s factual findings underpinning its Article 12 determination for clear error, and its ultimate conclusion that Brianna is not now settled in the United States de novo.”
• “We can see nothing in the Convention itself, in our case law, or in the practical reality of living in this country without documented status, to persuade us that immigration status should ordinarily play a significant, let alone dispositive, role in the ‘settled’ inquiry.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Mendoza v. Miranda

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Mendoza v. Miranda
  C.D. California· 2007-12-03· cited 10×
• Mendoza v. Miranda
  Ninth Circuit· 2009-03-18