Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2001 OK 117 - Daniel v. Daniel

Daniel v. Daniel’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
2
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

54 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Varbel v. Varbel (2014), King v. King (2005)

54 state decisions

270200120102020decided

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 Holder v. Polanski · TRW/Reda Pump v. Brewington · Hough v. Leonard · Matter of Chad S. · Gibbons v. Gibbons

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

  1. “is better able to determine controversial evidence by its observation of the parties, the witnesses and their demeanor.”
    23 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[UInder no cireumstances may a modification in custody based on a change of circumstances be effected unless the request, ing parent demonstrates: 1) a permanent, substantial and material change in circumstances; 2) the change in circumstances must adversely affect the best interests of the child; and 3) the temporal, moral and mental welfare of the child would be better off if custody is changed to the other parent as requested.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A. In awarding the custody of a minor unmarried child or in appointing a general guardian for said child, the court shall consider what appears to be in the best interests of the physical and mental and moral welfare of the child. B. The court, pursuant to the provisions of subsection A of this section, may grant the care, custody, and control of a child to either parent or to the parents jointly. For the purposes of this section, the terms joint custody and joint care, custody, and control mean the sharing by parents in all or some of the aspects of physical and legal care, custody, and control of their children. C. If either or both parents have requested joint custody, said parents shall file with the court their plans for the exercise of joint care, custody, and control of their child. The parents of the child may submit a plan jointly, or either parent or both parents may submit separate plans. Any plan shall include but is not limited to provisions detailing the physical living arrangements for the child, child support obligations, medical and dental care for the child, school placement, and visitation rights. A plan shall be accompanied by an affidavit signed by each parent stating that said parent agrees to the plan and will abide by its terms. The plan and affidavit shall be filed with the petition for a divorce or legal separation or after said petition is filed.”
    4 later decisions 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.