Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 199 Md. 341 - Ross v. Pick

Ross v. Pick’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

110
cited by 110 later decisions
5
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

4 district · 106 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 110 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Ross v. Hoffman (1977), In Re Adoption/Guardianship No. 3598 (1997)

4 district · 106 state decisions

2601952196019701980199020002010decided

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 Thormann v. Frame · Dietrich v. Anderson · Richards v. Collins · Wilson v. Mitchell · Chapsky v. Wood

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

  1. ““Where parents claim the custody of a child, there is a prima facie presumption that the child’s welfare will be best subserved in the care and custody of its parents rather than in the custody of others, and the burden is then cast upon the parties opposing them to show the contrary.””
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he child’s own wishes may be consulted and given weight if he [or she] is of sufficient age and capacity to form a rational judgment. The desires of the child are consulted, not because of any legal right to decide the question of custody, but because the court should know them in order to be better able to exercise its discretion wisely. It is not the whim of the child that the court respects, but [the child’s] feelings, attachments, reasonable preference and probable contentment.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The father and mother are the joint natural guardians of their child under eighteen years of age and are jointly and severally charged with its support, care, nurture, welfare and education. They shall have equal powers and duties, and neither parent has any right superior to trie right of the other concerning the child’s custody, If either the father or mother dies, or abandons his or her family, or is incapable of acting, the guardianship devolves upon the other parent. Where the parents live apart, the court may award the guardianship of the child to either of them but, in any custody proceeding, neither parent shall be given preference solely because of his or her sex. Provided: The provisions of this article shall not be deemed to affect the existing law relative to the appointment of a third person as guardian of the person of the minor where the parents are unsuitable, or the child’s interests would be adversely affected by remaining under the natural guardianship of its parent or parents.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.