Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 155 KAN 213 - Jones v. Jones

Jones v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

1942

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
2
states following
March 1994
most recently cited

31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently March 1994 · most notably In Re Guardianship of Williams (1994), Christlieb v. Christlieb (1956)

31 state decisions

130194219501960197019801990decided

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 Chapsky v. Wood · In re Bort · Pinney v. Sulzen · Swarens v. Swarens · Hollinger v. Eldredge

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

  1. ““It is firmly established by repeated decisions' of this court that a parent who is able to care for a child and desires to do so, and who has not been found to be an unfit person to have the custody of the child, in an action or proceeding where that question is in issue and upon competent evidence, is entitled to the custody of the child as against grandparents or others who have no permanent legal right to the custody of the child, even though at the time they are giving the child suitable care and have acquired an attachment for the child.” 155 Kan. at 219 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““On December 6 the parties filed with the court a written stipulation by which they agreed ‘that the care, custody and control of the minor child of said litigants, Madalene Irene Jones, shall be given over to Mabel Jones of Toronto, Kan., grandmother of said child, pending further orders of the court with respect to said child’s care, custody and control.’. . . . This stipulation was considered and approved by the court on December 6, 1938. Plaintiff was granted a divorce, and custody of the child was given to defendant’s mother, Mabel Jones, pending the further order of the court. “Early in 1941 — the exact date not shown — -plaintiff filed in the divorce action an application for an order modifying the previous order respecting the custody of the child and asking that she be granted the care, custody and control of the child.” 155 Kan. at 214-15 .”
    1 later decision 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.