Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2015 UT App 302 - Pingree v. Pingree

2015 UT App 302 - Pingree v. Pingree’s Empirical Analysis

2015

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Hudema v. Carpenter · Schindler v. Schindler · 2013 UT App 84 - Donnelly v. Donnelly · 2010 UT App 261 - Grindstaff v. Grindstaff · 2014 UT App 264 - Veysey v. Veysey

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

  1. “In all custody determinations, the [trial] court's primary focus must be on the best interests of the child.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a conditional change of custody ordered under section 30-3-37(4) is triggered only if ... a custodial parent elects to relocate despite a court's finding that relocation would not be in the child's best interest”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “if a court determines that relocation is not in a child's best interest, it then has authority to order a change in custody if a custodial parent chooses to relocate,”
    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.