Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2003 SD 91 - Goeden v. Daum

Goeden v. Daum’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
November 2021
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably Nickles v. Nickles (2015), March v. Thursby (2011)

30 state decisions

190200320102020decided

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 Grode v. Grode · Sjomeling v. Stuber · State v. McGarrett · Marks v. Clark

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

  1. “[w]e cannot meaningfully review the trial court decision without the trial court’s reasons for ruling the way it did. The standard of review requires that we first determine whether the findings of fact are clearly erroneous. Without findings of fact, there is no way to determine the basis for the trial court’s conclusions that [the protection order should have been granted] or whether those findings were clearly erroneous. Secondly, we are to determine whether the trial court abused its discretion in light of those findings in granting the protection order.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[O]ur function is not to decide factual issues de novo. The question is not whether this court would have made the same findings that the trial court did, but whether on the entire evidence we are left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. This court is not free to disturb the lower court’s findings unless it is satisfied that they are contrary to a clear preponderance of the evidence. Doubts about whether the evidence supports the court’s findings of fact are to be resolved in favor of the successful party’s ‘version of the evidence and of all inferences fairly deducible therefrom which are favorable to the court’s action.’”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “It is well-settled law that it is the [circuit] court's duty to make required findings of fact, and the failure to do so constitutes reversible error.”
    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.