Kelly v. Kelly’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

46 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A party seeking custody modification under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.6(4) is entitled to an evidentiary hearing if the party brings a prima facie case, by alleging, with supporting affidavits, sufficient facts which, if uncontradicted, would support a custody modification in favor of that party. Generally, the opposing party must rebut a prima facie case by going forward with evidence showing the moving party is not entitled to the relief requested. Where the opposing party presents counter affidavits which conclusively establish that the allegations of the moving party have no credibility or where the movant's allegations are, on their face, insufficient, even if uncontradicted, to justify custody modification, the court, under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.6(4), can find the moving party has not brought a prima facie case and deny the motion without an evidentiary hearing.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. In Re Thompson · Niemann v. Niemann

2. “The court may modify a prior custody order after the two-year period following the date of entry of an order establishing custody 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.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Thompson · Niemann v. Niemann

3. ““1. For the purpose of parental rights and responsibilities, the best interests and welfare of the child is determined by the court’s consideration and evaluation of all factors affecting the best interests and welfare of the child. These factors include all of the following when applicable: “a. The love, affection, and other emotional ties existing between the parents and child and the ability of each parent to provide the child with nurture, love, affection, and guidance. “b. The ability of each parent to assure that the child receives adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care, and a safe environment. “e. The child’s developmental needs and the ability of each parent to meet those needs, both in the present and in the future. “d. The sufficiency and stability of each parent’s home environment, the impact of extended family, the length of time the child has lived in each parent’s home, and the desirability of maintaining continuity in the child’s home and community. “e. The willingness and ability of each parent to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing relationship between the other parent and the child, “f. The moral fitness of the parents, as that fitness impacts the child. “g. The mental and physical health of the parents, as that health impacts the child. “h. The home, school, and community records of the child and the potential effect of any change. “i. If the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that a child is of sufficient maturity to make a so”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Thompson · Vining v. Renton