Rogers v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
4
states following
June 1968
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Finlay v. Finlay · Sheehy v. Sheehy · Martin v. Gardner · State-Planters Bank & Trust Co. of Richmond v. Commonwealth · Wilson v. Wilson
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The local court of an infant’s legal domicile has jurisdiction to determine its custody. Wilson v. Wilson, 136 Va. 643 , 118 S. E. 270 . However, jurisdiction of such courts is not exclusive. See Sheehy v. Sheehy, 88 N. H. 223, 186 A. 1 , 107 A. L. R. 635; Finlay v. Finlay, 240 N. Y. 429 , 148 N. E. 624 , 40 A. L. R. 937; Martin v. Gardiner, 240 Mass. 350 , 134 N. E. 380 . In Virginia the actual presence of the infants within the jurisdiction of the court is sufficient to determine the venue of the action. Code, section 1907, expressly authorizes any local juvenile and domestic relations court to determine the custody of any ‘neglected’ child ‘who resides in or who is actually within a city or county of this State.’ ” 176 Va. 355, 361 , 11 S. E. 2d 584, 586, 587 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Falco v. Grills
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.