143 Ohio App. 3d 1 - Beaver v. Weaver’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably 152 Ohio App. 3d 174 - Bragg v. Hatfield (2003), Cowan v. Cowan, Unpublished Decision (11-12-2004) (2004)
35 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
Relies on Blakemore v. Blakemore · Davis v. Flickinger · Miller v. Miller · Bechtol v. Bechtol · 130 Ohio App. 3d 648 - Clark v. Smith
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The court shall not modify a prior decree allocating parental rights and responsibilities for the care of children unless it finds, based on facts that have arisen since the prior decree or that were unknown to the court at the time of the prior decree, that a change has occurred in the circumstances of the child, the child’s residential parent, or either of the parents subject to a shared parenting decree, and that the modification is necessary to serve the best interest of the child. In applying these standards, the court shall retain the residential parent designated by the prior decree or the prior shared parenting decree, unless a modification is in the best interest of the child and one of the following applies: * * “(iii) The harm likely to be caused by a change of environment is outweighed by the advantages of the change of environment to the child.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“environment. The statute is an attempt to provide some stability to the custodial *Page 14 status of the children, even though the parent out of custody may be able to prove that he or she can provide a better environment.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The court shall not modify a prior decree allocating parental rights and responsibilities for the care of children unless it finds, based on facts that have arisen since the prior decree or that were unknown to the court at the time of the prior decree, that a change has occurred in the circumstances of the child, the child's residential parent, or either of the parents subject to a shared parenting decree, and that the modification is necessary to serve the best interest of the child. In applying these standards, the court shall retain the residential parent designated by the *Page 13 prior decree or the prior shared parenting decree, unless a modification is in the best interest of the child and one of the following applies: The harm likely to be caused by a change of environment is outweighed by the advantages of the change of environment to the child.”
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.