Hill v. Weber’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

25 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““6. The court may modify the primary residential responsibility after the two-year period following the date of entry of an order establishing primary residential responsibility if the court finds: “a. On the basis of facts that have arisen since the prior order or which were unknown to the court at the time of the prior order, a material change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the parties; and “b. The modification is necessary to serve the best interest of the child.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Vining v. Renton · Holtz v. Holtz

2. “The district court found the violence against the older daughter created a threat to her health and safety. We agree with the trial court, if the criteria of [N.D.C.C. § 14 — 09—06.6(3)(b)] are met, there is as a matter of law a material change of circumstances that warrants a change of custody under [N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.6(6)]. [[Image here]] Here, the older daughter testified her father repeatedly hit her as hard as he could on the back of her head with an open hand, causing her pain. Although there was contrary testimony, the district court found the older daughter more credible than the other witnesses. The district court noted the general state of human knowledge that repeated hits to the head may cause injury. See Arthur C. Roberts, The Value of Outcome Studies in Litigating Closed Head Injury Cases, 30 Trauma 39 (1988). The finding of fact is supported by the testimony of the older daughter, and we will not substitute our judgment on credibility for that of the district court. The finding of fact is not clearly erroneous.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Burns v. Burns

3. “[T]he older daughter, age 14, alleged abuse, testifying she was often struck on the back of her head by her father and told to get her duties done. She further testified her father would hit her as hard as he could with an open hand, and that he had been doing it since before the divorce. The mother testified the father had a history of abusing her and the children.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Burns v. Burns