Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 175 Ind. App. 132 - Bgl v. Cls

175 Ind. App. 132 - Bgl v. Cls’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
November 1998
most recently cited

13 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on McFarlan v. Fowler Bank City Trust Co. · 154 Ind. App. 203 - Roe v. Doe · 94 Ind. App. 300 - Denning v. Star Publishing Co. · 117 Ind. App. 162 - Barkey v. Stowell

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

  1. “"[The father] further insists that the legal proceeding is for the benefit of the child; any amounts recovered for the period of time prior to date of judgment would amount to reimbursement for the benefit of the mother rather than for the benefit of the child. "IC 1971, 31-4-1-8, [the predecessor of Indiana Code section 81-6-6.1-183], specifically provides that '[the mother may recover from the father a reasonable share of the necessary support and care of the child....' When a mother, in the past, has alone shouldered the financial burden of caring for the child even though such responsibility properly is to be shared by both parents of a child born out of wedlock, a mother should not be penalized for so acting. Her expenditures were for the benefit of the child. When the mother is reimbursed, the amounts paid will likely benefit the child by improving the financial situation of the mother and thereby enable her to provide her share of support for the child in the future and to provide better physical surroundings for the child. We conclude that the trial court did not err. Its order of support promotes the purpose of the act: to enable a child born out of wedlock to have those rights and privileges enjoyed by children born in wedlock."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In view of all the facts and circumstances before the trial court, it did not abuse its discretion in finding that defendant's conduct was excusable in failing to appear and defend the lawsuit. There were sufficient facts presented to support setting aside the default judgment. The conclusions reached by the trial court were not clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court or the reasonable, probable, and actual deductions to be drawn therefrom.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “... Not more than two [2] years' accrued support furnished prior to the bringing of the action may be recovered from the father or his representative.”
    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.