Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 188 Conn. 385 - Cersosimo v. Cersosimo

Cersosimo v. Cersosimo’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
2
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

4 district · 73 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably 13 Conn. App. 300 - O'Neill v. O'Neill (1988), Darak v. Darak (1989)

4 district · 73 state decisions

4001982199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1654

Relies on Faretta v. California · Osborn v. President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States · Eisenstadt v. Baker · Pasquariello v. Pasquariello · Bozzi v. Bozzi

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

  1. “bound by the same rules of evidence and procedure as those qualified to practice law.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[u]nless and to the extent that [a] decree precludes modification, any final order for the periodic payment of permanent alimony or support . . . may at any time thereafter be continued, set aside, altered or modified by said court upon a showing of substantial change in the circumstances of either party or upon a showing that the final order for child support substantially deviates from the child support guidelines established pursuant to section 46b-215a . . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “`established policy to allow great latitude to a litigant who, either by choice or necessity, represents himself in legal proceedings, so far as such latitude is consistent with the just right of any adverse party.'”
    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.