Williams v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 state decisions

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

1. “(1)the love, affection, and other emotional ties which may exist between the grandparent and child; (2) the nature and quality of the grandparent-child relationship and the length of time that it has existed; (3) whether visitation will promote or disrupt the child’s development; (4) the physical, emotional, mental, and social needs of the child; (5) the wishes and opinions of the parents; and (6) the willingness and ability of the grandparent to facilitate and encourage a close relationship among the parent and the child.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Deem v. Lobato · In Re Parentage of CAMA

2. “Troxel may have altered, but it did not eradicate, the kind of balancing process that normally occurs in visitation decisions”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Chatterjee v. King · Deem v. Lobato

3. “(1) any factors relevant to the best interests of the child; (2) the prior interaction between the grandparent and the child; (3) the prior interaction between the grandparent and each parent of the child; (4) the present relationship between the grandparent and each parent of the child; (5) time-sharing or visitation arrangements that were in place prior to filing of the petition; (6) the effect the visitation with the grandparent will have on the child; (7) if the grandparent has any prior convictions for physical, emotional or sexual abuse or neglect; and (8) if the grandparent has previously been a full-time caretaker for the child for a significant period.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Deem v. Lobato