Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 129 A3D 521 - E.R. v. J.N.B.

E.R. v. J.N.B.’s Empirical Analysis

2015

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
October 2022
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Vaccone v. Syken · 2014 Pa. Super. 146 - S.W.D. v. S.A.R. · 2012 Pa. Super. 200 - V.B. v. J.E.B. · 2005 Pa. Super. 192 - Weber v. Lancaster Newspapers, Inc. · 2005 Pa. Super. 268 - Karch v. Karch

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In reviewing a custody order, our scope is of the broadest type and our standard is abuse of discretion. We must accept findings of the trial court that are supported by competent evidence of record, as our role does not include making independent factual determinations. In addition, with regard to issues of credibility and weight of the evidence, we must defer to the presiding trial judge who viewed and assessed the witnesses first-hand. However, we are not bound by the trial court's deductions or inferences from its factual findings. Ultimately, the test is whether the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable as shown by the evidence of record. We may reject the conclusions of the trial court only if they involve an error of law, or are unreasonable in light of the sustainable findings of the trial court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.