Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2004 ND 15 - Tank v. Tank

Tank v. Tank’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
states following
January 2026
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably Schumacker v. Schumacker (2011), Green v. Green (2009)

23 state decisions

100200420102020decided

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 State v. Schill · Schnoor Ex Rel. Schnoor v. Meinecke

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. “The legislature has provided that before there is a hearing on change of custody, the petitioner must present affidavits establishing a prima facie case justifying a modification. N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.6(4). "Prima facie evidence" or "prima facie case" are legal terms with well-established meanings. See Black's Law Dictionary 579 & 1209 (7th ed.1999). The North Dakota Century Code itself specifies how it is to be interpreted. N.D.C.C. tit. 1. The Code specifies that words are to be understood in their ordinary sense unless a contrary meaning plainly appears. N.D.C.C. § 1-02-02. The Code specifies that there is no common law (judge-made law) when the law is declared by statute. N.D.C.C. § 1-01-06. Here the majority interprets prima facie evidence in a way contrary to the ordinarily understood meaning of the term, and the majority substitutes its judge-made law for the enactment of the legislature.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “they do not show a basis of actual personal knowledge, or they are conclusory, stating conclusions without the support of evidentiary facts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “are generally not competent to testify to what they only `suspect' or `secretly hope' the facts are.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.