Matter of RW’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Department (2002), State Ex Rel. Children, Youth & Families Department v. Vanessa C. (2000)
34 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 25 U.S.C. § 1901 (§ 2 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Alexander v. Delgado Ex Rel. Delgado · Lee v. Lee · Matter of Adoption of Doe · In Re William L.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For evidence to be clear and convincing, it must instantly tilt the scales in the affirmative when weighed against the evidence in opposition and the fact finder's mind is left with an abiding conviction that the evidence is true.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“A. The rights of a parent, including an adjudicated, acknowledged, biological, presumed or adoptive parent, may be terminated with reference to a child by the court as provided in this section. In proceedings to terminate parental rights, the court shall give primary consideration to the physical, menial and emotional welfare and needs of the child. B. The court shall terminate parental rights with respect to a minor child when: (1) the minor has been abandoned by the parents; (2) the minor has been left under such circumstances that the identification of the parents is unknown and cannot be ascertained, despite a diligent search by the department and the parents have not come forward to claim the minor for three months; (3) the child has been a neglected or abused child as defined in Section 32-1-3 NMSA 1978 and the court finds that the conditions and causes of the neglect and abuse are unlikely to change in the foreseeable future despite reasonable efforts by the department or other appropriate agency to assist the parent in adjusting the conditions which render the parent unable to properly care for the child; or (4) the child has been placed in the care of others, including care by other relatives, either by a court order or otherwise and the following conditions exist: (a) the child has lived in the home of others for an extended period of time; (b) the parent-child relationship has disintegrated; (e) a psychological parent-child relationship has developed between the su”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Even in a case involving issues that must be established by clear and convincing evidence, it is for the finder of fact, and not for reviewing courts, to weigh conflicting evidence and decide where the truth lies. We defer to the trial court, not because it is convenient, but because the trial court is in a better position than we are to make findings of fact and also because that is one of the responsibilities given to trial courts rather than appellate courts. Our responsibility is to review for reversible error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.