Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 166 Vt. 373 - Titchenal v. Dexter

Titchenal v. Dexter’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
9
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably T.B. v. L.R.M. (2001), Vermont Right to Life Committee, Inc. v. Sorrell (2000)

2 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

340199720002010decided

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 Linn v. United States · Chapman v. Sheridan-Wyoming Coal Co. · Desmond v. New Valley Corp. · 193 Wis. 2d 649 - In Re Custody of HSHK · Sabia v. State

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

  1. “[U]nder the scheme advocated by plaintiff and amicus curiae, the family court would adjudicate disputes concerning parental rights and responsibilities and parent-child contact within the parameters and criteria set forth in statutory divorce, parentage, dependency and neglect, nonsupport and separation, relief-from-abuse, and at times guardianship and adoption proceedings, while the superior court would exert.its equitable powers to consider such disputes arising outside these statutory proceedings. We find no legal basis for plaintiff’s proposal. Courts cannot exert equitable powers unless they first have jurisdiction over the subject matter and parties.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “jurisdiction should not rest upon a test that in effect would examine the merits of visitation or custody petitions on a case-by-case basis. In reality, such a fact-based test would not be a threshold jurisdictional test, but rather would require a full-blown evidentiary hearing in most cases. Thus, any such test would not prevent parents from having to defend themselves against the merits of petitions brought by a potentially wide range of third parties claiming a parent-like relationship with their child.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Given the complex social and practical ramifications of expanding the classes of persons entitled to assert parental rights by seeking custody or visitation, the Legislature is better equipped to deal with the problem. Deference to the Legislature is particularly appropriate in this arena because the laws pertaining to parental rights and responsibilities and parent-child contact have been developed over time solely through legislative enactment or judicial construction of legislative enactments.”
    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.