Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 150 F.2d 153 - Boone v. Boone

Boone v. Boone’s Empirical Analysis

150 F.2d 153 · 1945

Citation profile

106
cited by 106 later decisions
7
states following
August 2006
most recently cited

40 federal appellate · 4 district · 53 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 106 later decisions — most recently August 2006 · most notably Hodgson v. United Mine Workers of America (1972), In Re Petition for Adoption of J. S. R. (1977)

40 federal appellate · 4 district · 53 state decisions

4101945195019601970198019902000decided

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 Boone v. Lightner · 13 Wash. 2d 673 - In Re the Welfare of Hudson · In re Adoption of a Minor · Wear v. Wear · Kartman v. Kartman

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

  1. ““Although the present proceeding is in the name of the children, appellant’s argument is pitched, largely, upon the adversary rights of the parents; much weight is given to judgments entered, orders issued and disobeyed. We may as well recognize that such considerations are very unreal in the case of parents and children. In doing so we do not for a moment sanction kidnapping or encourage contempt of court. The important consideration is that when a court is confronted with a question of custody, it is required to act as parens patriae. Under such circumstances, children cannot be used as pawns in a game of legal chess to work out conceptions of status and property rights.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “We think that, for this purpose, in a custody case of the present character, the court, if possible, should call to its aid experienced and disinterested persons, such as its probation officers or the trained social workers in the Board of Public Welfare, to make an unbiased examination of the qualifications of these parents and of the circumstances which surround these children. We realize that the suggested procedure is new and one which the Court may very properly have hesitated to initiate on its own motion. But it is in line with well-recognized procedures in other cases in which the court acts as parens patriae, [footnote omitted]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““If the pleadings and evidence revealed a situation which required action, it was the duty of the court to act in behalf of these childr en and for their protection, regardless of anything previously said or done by any court. Our function under such circumstances is, only, to review the question whether the trial court properly exercised its discretion with a view to the present welfare of the children.””
    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.