Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 149 Mich. App. 196 - Spada v. Pauley

149 Mich. App. 196 - Spada v. Pauley’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
9
states following
August 2003
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently August 2003 · most notably G.E.B. v. S.R.W. (1996), Johnson v. Hunter (1989)

25 state decisions

180198619902000decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 666 (§ 466 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

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

  1. “A mother may have a variety of reasons for not initiating paternity proceedings: she may have a continuing relation with or affection for the father; she may wish to avoid continuing any relation with the father, including child support; she may wish to avoid the disapproval of her family or the community that she believes a paternity action would produce; she may be subject to the emotional strain and confusion that often attend the birth of a child born out of wedlock and continue for a prolonged period, hindering any effort by her to seek child support; she may be able to support the child and not foresee a change in her circumstances.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “Both article 1, § 2 of the Michigan Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provide that no person shall be denied the equal protection of the law. Classifications based on illegitimacy are invalid under the Fourteenth Amendment if they are not substantially related to permissible state interests,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.