Boisvert v. Harrington’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 state decisions

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

1. ““There is no per se statutory preference in favor of the natural father of a child born out of wedlock, and the statute does not impose on third parties seeking custody the initial burden of proving the father to be incompetent or unsuitable. ■ “For the above reasons, the statute does not prevent a grandparent from competing on an equal footing with a biological father for the guardianship and custody of an illegitimate child. If the statute alone controlled, we would have to reverse the judgment for the father .... ” “Because the father in Lehr 22 had not come forward to participate in the rearing of his child, he had no cognizable due process interest.... “However, to deny such status to a biological father who has developed the requisite custodial, personal or financial relationship with the child denies equal protection of the law to the biological father under the principles set forth in Lehr . “We conclude therefore that granting guardianship to a third person in preference to a parent who has demonstrated a commitment to parenthood based solely on a judicial determination of the best interests of the child — without first requiring the third party to demonstrate that the parent is unfit — denies the natural parent due process of law.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. In Re KMM · McDermott v. Dougherty

2. “[c]ustody cases involving natural parents inherently implicate the parents' fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. In Re Dis · Sidman v. Sidman

3. ““Moreover, the parental preference doctrine is only that — a preference — an advantage given to parents over other persons. It does not answer the question of what is in the child’s best interests. ‘The day is long past in this State, if it had ever been, when the right of a parent to the custody of his or her child, where the extraordinary circumstances are present, would be enforced inexorably, contrary to the best interest of the child, on the theory solely of an absolute legal right. Instead, in the extraordinary circumstance, when there is a conflict, the best interest of the child has always been regarded as superior to the right of parental custody. Indeed, analysis of the cases reveals a shifting of emphasis rather than a remaking of substance. This shifting reflects more the modern principle that a child is a person, and not a subperson over whom the parent has an absolute possessory interest.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. McDermott v. Dougherty