Strollo v. Strollo

How courts have described this case

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

• retaining jurisdiction on technically moot case because “the issue involves construction of a statute which courts must routinely apply, ... is an issue of wide and significant public concern, and ... is likely to recur and would likely escape judicial review”
• retaining jurisdiction on technically moot case because “the issue involves construction of a statute which courts must routinely apply, ... is an issue of wide and significant public concern, and ... is likely to recur and would likely escape judicial review”
• denial of protective order case raising first impression question of whether applicant needs to be in “immediate peril”
• denial of protective order mooted when party obtained order from different judge, but court addressed case under “capable of repetition” standard because of public interest in first impression question of whether applicant needed to be in “immediate peril”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).