Bell v. Krauss’s Empirical Analysis
1915
Citation profile
2 district · 44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently September 1982 · most notably Chandler v. Whatley (1939), 80 Cal. App. 3d 849 - In Re Marriage of O'Connell (1978)
2 district · 44 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 Brownell v. Superior Court of Yolo Cty. · Campbell v. Wright · Schammel v. Schammel · Guardianship of Van Loan · 6 Cal. App. 629 - Thomas v. Superior Court, Etc.
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““There was no finding that the father was an unfit person to have possession and control of the child. The placing of the infant in charge of the mother was not such judicial deprivation of the custody of the child on account of the neglect of the father as is contemplated in section 224 of the Civil Code. Divorces are not granted for offenses against children and the bestowal of the custody of a minor in a divorce action is not, unless otherwise provided by statute, an adjudication of the fitness of the parent who is for the time denied the right to retain possession of the child. It is nothing more than the expression of the court’s belief that under the circumstances then existing, the welfare of the child would be best subserved by placing said child with one of the parents rather than the other. Upon the death of a mother to whom a child has been given by a decree of divorce, the father becomes entitled to the custody of the child. (Schammel v. Schammel, 105 Cal. 261 [ 38 Pac. 729 ]; Civ. Code, secs. 197 and 246; Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1751.) Prima facie a parent is presumed competent and he is entitled to have the custody of his child unless found by the court to be incompetent. . (In re Campbell, 130 Cal. 383 [ 62 Pac. 613 ].)””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Prima facie a parent is presumed competent and he is entitled to have the custody of his child unless found by the court to be incompetent. (In re Campbell, 130 Cal. 383 [ 62 P. 613 ].)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Navarro v. Hull
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.